p 

658 
F68 
1896 
MAIN 


UC-NRLF 


B    4    02D    MSb 


IV 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

University  of  California. 


GIKT  OF^ 


Class 


THE   NEGATIVES 


OF    THE 


INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 


A    DISSERTATION    PRESENTED   TO    THE   FACULTY   OF 

ARTS,    LITERATURE,    AND    SCIENCE,    OF    THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO,  IN  CANDIDACY 

FOR    THE    DEGREE    OF    DOCTOR 

OF    PHILOSOPHY 


BY 
FRANK  HAMILTON  FOWLER 


CHICAGO 

€iit  UniUxMtii  of  ari)trago  ^uw 

T896 


THE    NEGATIVES    OF    THE    INDO-EUKOPEAN 
LANGUAGES. 


PRIMITIVE    INDO-EUROPEAN. 

I.  I.E.  me:  Skr.  md,  Av.  md,  O.P.  md,  Or.  fxrj  (Doric  ix-rj),  Arm. 
mi,  Alb.  nio-  (in  mo-s). 
II.  I.E.  «(?.•  Skr.  na,  Goth,  ni,  Lith.  //<?,  O.B.  ne,  Lat.  «<?,  Osc. 
ne,  Umbr.  ne.  I.E.  «^.-  Skr.  nd,  Lat.  //^,  Osc.  ;//,  Goth,  ne, 
O.Ir.  «/.  I.E.  hD:  Lat.  «^«,  Umbr.  no-  (in  no-sve),  O.Ir.  «« 
«a.  The  Skr.  words  given  under  ne  and  «^  and  various  com- 
pounds in  the  Iranian  languages  may,  of  course,  be  connected 
with  either  nc  or  no,  or  with  both. 

III.  I.E.  nei:  Av.  //ae-  (in  fiae-cis,  nae-da),  Lith.  net  ne-,  Lat.  nei 
nl,  Osc.  nei,  Umbr.  nei-  (in  nei-p),  probably  also  in  O.P.  naiy. 
I.E.  noi:  Lat.  «^v-  (in  noe-num  and  in  Duenos  noi-si  and 
noi-ne  {})),  Lith.  «^?/-  (in  nai-kinii).  As  in  the  case  of  I.E. 
«^  and  «^,  forms  in  Aryan  from  I.E.  nei  and  noi  cannot  be 
distinguished. 

IV.  I.E.  n:  Skr.  a-  an-,  Av.  a-  an-,  O.P.  a.  Arm.  a«-,  Gr.  d- 
av-,  Lat.  /«-,  O.Ir.  ««-,  Germanic  un-.  I.E.  //.•  Gr.  vtf  (Dor. 
va-),  Osc.  a;/-,  Umbr.  an-,   O.H.G-  a-,  O.E.  ^-. 

Of  these  I.E.  negatives,  without  doubt  fiei  and  «f/  are  ne  and 
«^  strengthened  by  the  particle  t,  seen  in  various  places  elsewhere.' 
I.E.  net  and  noi,  then,  are  examples  of  a  phenomenon  —  the 
strengthening  of  a  negative  —  which  was  often  repeated  in  the 
separate  developments. 

The  relation  of  ne  ne  no  no  is  plainly  one  of  ablaut ;  and  it 
would  seem  most  natural  to  consider  ;/  n  as  the  weak  ablaut  forms 
of  the  same  particle.*  The  prevailing  use  of  n  n  in  the  separate 
languages  as  negative  prefixes  indicates  that  those  forms  were  in 
the  proethnic  speech  the  negatives  of  nouns.     Now  it  is  easy  to 

^  E.  g.,  in  pronouns  (Lat.  quoi  qui),  in  the  Locative  suffixes  singular  and 
plural  {-i,  s-i  beside  s-u);  probably  also  the  same  particle  differentiates  the 
primary  from  the  secondary  verb  endings.  Cf.  Brugmann,  II,  414,  424,  256, 
356,  909;  O.  Brugmann,  Ni.,  32;  Per  Persson,  I.F.,  2,  247  ;  Thurneysen,  K.Z., 
27.  177- 

''So  Schulze,  K.Z.,  27,  606,  and  otliers. 


2  NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

understand  that  there  should  be  differences  between  the  prevail- 
ing accentual  relations  in  combinations  of  negative  and  verb 
and  of  negative  and  noun  which  should  give  rise  to  different 
ablaut  forms  of  the  negative  particle.  According  to  Delbriick' 
this  difference  is  to  be  connected  with  the  enclisis  of  the  verb 
in  independent  sentences.  But  Zimmer'  has  argued  conclu- 
sively, I  think,  that  the  condition  of  verbal  enclisis  in  I.E.  was 
not  position  in  an  independent  sentence,  but  was  simply  a  matter 
of  sentence  accent.  It  would  still  be  the  case,  however,  that  in  a 
collocation  of  nep'ative  and  verb  the  verb  would  generally  be 
enclitic,  and  the  result  of  this  is  clearly  shown  in  the  conditions 
of  verbal  enclisis  in  O.Ir.  The  only  objection  to  considering 
the  various  negative  prefixes  mentioned  above  as  representatives 
of  I.E.  //  and  //  and  these  as  weak  ablaut  forms  of  )ie  is  the  pres- 
ence of  such  dissyllabic  forms  as  Av.  ana-,  Gr.  dva-.  But  these,  I 
think,  are  to  be  disposed  of  otherwise  (see  p.  8). 

The  forms  //  //  were  the  only  ones  used  with  nouns  in  the  pro- 
ethnic  speech.  With  the  exception  of  the  Balto-Slavic,  none  of 
the  languages  has  ne,  ne,  no,  or  no  used  as  a  negative  prefix.^  The 
common  occurrence  of  compounds  of  a  negative  with  an  indefinite 
adverb  or  pronoun  (<?.  g.,  Skr.  iid-kis,  ma-kis;  Av.  nae-cis ;  Gr. 
/AT/'Tts,  ix-q-ifixy,  ixrj-8€t<;,  ovScls  ;  Lat.  iicjno,  nun-qiiani,  ne-cubi;  Eng. 
none,  never,  etc.)  is  no  evidence  for  the  use  as  a  prefix  of  the  neg- 
ative so  compounded.''  A  sharp  distinction  is  to  be  made  between 
such  compounds  and  compounds  like  avtWos,  intactiis,  unhappy, 
etc.  With  these  indefinite  compounds  the  negative  prefixes  of  a 
given  language  never  occur.  This  is  seen  most  clearly  in  Balto- 
Slavic.^  In  other  languages  representatives  of  I.E.  ne  may  appear 
compounded  with  indefinites,  but  here  where  alone  I.E.  ne  becomes 
a  negative  prefix  it  is  not  so  used.  The  indefinite  compound  arises 
from  collocation   in  the  sentence.     In  a  sentence  containing  a 

'Syn.  Forsch.,  IV,  146. 

'Festgruss  an  Roth,  173;  cf.  Hirt,  Akzent,  304  f. 

3  The  very  few  words  in  other  languages  which  have  sometimes  been  men- 
tioned as  showing  tie-  used  as  negative  prefix  I  shall  speak  of  under  the  several 
languages. 

■»  Hirt  (Akzent,  312  f.)  has  most  recently  fallen  into  this  error  of  citing 
indefinite  compounds  in  support  of  the  supposition  that  the  form  ve  was  used  as 
a  prefix. 

^  Cf.  Lith.  nevens,  "non  unus  sed  plures,"  and  nei  vi'tts.  "nullus; "  and  see 
Gehauer,  Archiv  f.  Slav.  Thil.,  8,  177  ff. 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES  3 

sentence-negative  and  in  which  the  verb  has  for  its  subject  an 
indefinite  pronoun  or  is  modified  by  an  indefinite  adverb  the 
effect  is  the  same  whether  the  negative  is  felt  with  the  verb  or 
with  the  indefinite  subject  or  adverb.  The  same  is  not  true  if 
the  subject,  for  example,  is  other  than  indefinite.' 

So  far  as  I  know,  the  only  alleged  example  of  a  proethnic 
noun  showing  ne-  as  a  negative  prefix  is  nepot-  (Skr.  napdt,  Gr. 
v€'7roSes,  Lat.  ncpos,  etc.""),  regarded  by  many  as  a  compound  of  He 
and  pot-  (Skr.  pati-,  Gr.  Trocrts,  Lat.  potis,  Goth.  fadi).  But  the  iso- 
lation of  the  word  in  this  respect  should  make  us  skeptical  of  an 
etymology,  which,  moreover,  on  its  semasiological  side  is  none 
too  convincing.^ 

I  prefer  to  start  with  a  root  nep-^,  with  meaning  "to  bring 
forth "  or  something  of  the  sort,  to  which  was  added  a  suffix 
consisting  of  a  dental  preceded  by  a  vowel.  With  this  root  is 
to  be  connected  the  root  )ieb-,  in  Gr.  ve(3p6'5,  which  I  shall  have 
occasion  to  discuss  below. 

As  for  the  suffix  -od  or  -ot,  which  we  have  to  assume  if  we  take 
the  root  to  be  nep-,  we  may  suppose  that  the  suffix  was  -od,  and 
that  the  -d-  stem  became  a  -/-  stem  owing  to  the  scarcity  of  the 
-d-  stems,  except  in  Greek  where  -d-  stems  were  more  numerous.^ 

'  Three  other  classes  of  compounds  in  which  negatives  occur  might  be 
mentioned,  viz.,  strengthened  negative  adverbs,  e.  g.,  I.E.  net  not,  Skr.  na-ni'i. 
Gr.  oi}-/ct,  etc.;  compounds  in  which  for  the  most  part  the  original  force  of  the 
two  elements  is  retained,  e.  g.,  Lat.  7ieque,  Goth.  7ti-h ;  compounds  which  are 
in  origin  elliptical  expressions,  e.  g.,  Lat.  nlmJrum,  Skr.  ndsti-ka. 

'^  Cf.  Prellwitz,  sub  v.  vdirodes  ;  Osthoff,  Perfect.,  599  ;  J.  Baunack,  Studien, 
272  ;  Leumann,  Festgruss  an  Bothlingk,  77  ;  Streitberg,  LF.,  Ill,  334  ;  de  Saus- 
sure,  Mem.  Soc.  Ling.,  Ill,  196  ;  Brugmann,  II,  123  ;  and  see  Panini,  V,  3,  75, 
for  the  origin  of  the  derivation. 

3  Skr.  napdt  tiaptr  Grassmann  defines  as  i )  Abkommling,  2)  Sohn,  3)  Enkel ; 
the  Av.  napaf  means  "descendant,"  Av.  napti  "posterity;"  O.B.  netij'i  "  Ge 
schwistersohn ;  "  Bohemian  tieti  "  niece  ;  "  O.H.G.  nefo  "grandson,"  "  relative ;" 
Lat.  «i'/Jj  "descendant,"  "nephew,"  "grandson;"  Lat.  «ir//w  " granddaugh- 
ter;" Gr.  I'eVoSes  "children;"  Gr.  a.ve\f/i6s  "nephew"  (see  Prellwitz  5«^  v.). 
The  meanings  of  the  words  in  the  various  languages  ("nephew,"  "grandson," 
"descendant")  indicate  that  at  the  end  of  the  I.E.  period  the  word  had  the 
meaning  "descendant."  The  usual  etymology  leads  to  the  meaning  "weak- 
ling." The  supposition  that  the  idea  of  "  descendant "  was  derived  from  that 
of  "weakling"  is,  of  course,  possible,  but  hardly  satisfactory. 

*  Cf.  Spiegel,  K.Z.,  14,  392. 

5  6/.  Brugmann,  I,  128;  Osthoff,  Perfect.,  159.  The  presence  of  iruis  in 
Greek  might  exert  an  especial  influence  in  keeping  the  -d-. 


4  NEGATIVES  OF  TIJE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

The  suffixal  -</-,  though  never  very  common  —  except  in  Greek — , 
is  found  after  various  vowels':  -ad,  Gr.  <^vy-a8-;  -id-  (probably 
I.E.  in  some  cases),  Gr.  6.<jit-&-,  Lat.  capid;  -ud,  V,-aX.  pal-ud- ;  iid, 
Lat.  pec-ud-;  ed  or  ed,  Lat.  her-ed-.  A  suffix  -od-  would  not  be 
strange,  though  unsupported  by  more  than  this  one  example.  It 
is  to  be  noted,  however,  that  three  or  four  words  in  Sanskrit  — 
drsad  "rock,"  hhasdd  "back  parts,"  (arad  "autumn,"  and 
vafidd{})   "desire" — may  have  I.E.  -f^^/,  and   that  the  Germanic 

words   with    -at e.   g.,   Goth,   laiih-at-jaii,   O.H.G.    lohazzen  — 

speak  as  much  for  I.E.  od  as  -ad-,  unless  indeed  -at-ja/i  is  to  be 
taken  as  equivalent  to  Gr.  -a^civ.  To  be  mentioned  in  the  same 
connection  is  the  common  Goth,  and  West  Germanic  sufifix  -assiis.'' 
Or,  on  the  other  hand,  the  suffix  may  be  an  example  of  the 
class,  limited  in  number,  of  suffixes  consisting  of  -/-  preceded  by 
a  vowel,  e.  g.,  Skr.  sravdt-,  mariit;  Cir.  KiXii'i,  KeX-riT-os  \  hat. /rg^s, 
scges,  caput  {^cap-ot);  Osc.  liimitu[m  ;  O.Ir.  cing-,  gen.  ciiiged; 
Goth,  mitaps;  O.H.G.  liclid?  In  this  case  we  must  suppose  that 
the  -/-  was  changed  to  -8-  in  Greek  under  the  influence  of  the  -8- 
stems,  as  Osthoff  has  claimed. 


THE  NEGATIVES  IN  THE  SEPARATE  LANGUAGES. 

SANSKRIT. 

Skr.  md,  I.E.  7ne. 

The  simple  negative  was  strengthened  by  various  particles  — 
liim,  n,  sma — ,  the  md  keeping  its  distinctive  meaning.  With 
-kis  it  formed  md-kis,  "nequis." 

Skr.  na,  I.E.  ne. 

Skr.  nd,''  I.E.  )ie. 

Skr.  ned  is  a  compound  of  na  and  id  (as  ced  from  ca  -\-  id), 
the  latter  undoubtedly  a  particle  from  the  pronominal  stem  i- 
seen   in   Cyprian  iV  (Hesychius),  O.Lat.  Im,  and  in   the  deictive 

'  Biugmann,  II,  123. 

"^  Cf.  Brugmann,  II,  loS;   Bahder,  N'erbalabstracta,  119. 

^Cf.  Brugmann,  II,  123,  for  other  examples,  and  Walter,  K.Z.,  X,  194  ff.,  in 
regard  to  Latin  eqties,  miles,  etc.  It  can  hardly  be  that  these  words  are  com- 
pounds of  -/-/-,  "going,"  and  even  in  case  of  coin-es  and  anti-stes  the  supposition 
is  dout)tful.  Cf.  Wharton,  s.  v.  comes.  See  also  de  Saussure,  Mem.  Soc.  Ling., 
Ill,  197. 

•»A.  ^r.,  K.V.,  10,  348. 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES  5 

particle  /  mentioned  above  under  I.E.  nei.  The  compound  was 
Aryan  (jiaid,  Av.  noit).  Skr.  na-klm,  na-hi,  nanu  show  iia 
strengthened  by  various  particles. 

Skr.  na  was  not  used  as  a  prefix.  Of  Panini's  lisf  napdt  has 
been  considered  above.  The  rest  are  either  altogether  fanciful, 
as  nakula,  "ichneumon,"  or  manifestly  impossible,  as  navedas, 
"knowing,"  with  the  exception  of  napuhsaka,  "hermaphrodite." 
But  I  hardly  think  the  word  can  stand  alone  as  an  example  of 
the  use  of  na-  as  a  prefix.  The  na-  is  probably  the  same  as  that 
seen  in  na-vedas,  whatever  that  may  be,  and  the  quasi-negative 
force  comes  from  the  diminutive. 

In  regard  to  the  relation  of  na  comparative  and  na  negative 
in  Sanskrit,  taking  into  consideration  the  existence  of  similar 
pairs  in  Balto-Slavic  and  O.Ir.,  we  should  sav,  I  think,  that,  either 
in  proethnic  times  or  in  the  separate  languages,  the  comparative 
was  developed  from  the  negative.^  Cf.  dialectic  English  "better 
nor  that." 

Skr.  cand  also  has  generally  been  taken  as  a  compound  of  na 
negative.3  But  Per  Persson  is  surely  right  here  in  supposing  that 
the  negative  meaning  is  a  derived  one.  Whatever  the  order  of 
development  of  meaning  of  cand,  the  uses  may  be  classified  as 
follows : 

{a)  Intensive:  i)  In  positive  sentences,  "indeed,"  2)  with  a 
negative,  "(not)  indeed." 

{b)  Negative:  i)  Strong  negative,  "indeed  not,"  2)  conjunc- 
tional negative,  "also  not,"  "and  not." 

Manifestly  three  explanations  are  possible  :  1)  That  cand,  a 
compound  of  ca  and  na,  negative,  was  used,  first  as  a  negative, 
then  as  a  second  negative  intensifying  the  first,  and  lastly  from 
being  a  negative  intensifier  cand  came  to  be  an  intensifier  that 
could  be  used  in  a  positive  sentence.  2)  An  explanation,  the 
direct  opposite  of  this,  that  cand,  a  compound  of  ca  and  na 
intensive,  was  used  first  as  an  intensive  particle  and  especiallv  to 
intensify  a  negative,  and  finally  as  an  adverb  with  a  negative  force 

"Panini's  list  (6,  3,  75)  is  7ial>hraj,  napat,  nasatyd,  namiici,  nakula,  nakha, 
napunsaka,  naksatra,  nakra,  navedas,  and  uaka. 

''Cf.  B.  and  R.,  sub  v.;  Grassmann,  sub  v.;  Delbriick,  Syn.  Forsch.,  5,  543; 
Pott,  Ety.  Forsch.,  i,  352;  and  Per  Persson,  I.F.,  II,  203. 

3  Grassmann,  sub  v.;  Eva  Channing,  J.A.O.S.,  13,  XCIX ;  Delbriick,  Syn. 
Forsch.,  V,  544;  Per  Persson,  I.F.,  2,  204 ;  and  cf.  Brugmann,  II,  421. 


6  NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

of  its  own.  3)  That  cand  intensive  and  cand  negative  were  of 
different  origin. 

The  very  frequent  use  of  cand  to  intensify  a  negative  (in  R.V. 
57  out  of  86,  in  A.V.  all  of  the  39  cases)  would  indicate  some 
sort  of  a  connection  between  the  negative  and  intensive  forces  of 
the  word.  Against  the  first  explanation  it  is  to  be  said  that  a 
composition  of  ca  and  na  negative  in  the  order  ca-ua  is  hardlv  to 
be  expected;  and  again,  it  is  difficult  to  see  how  cand  used  as  a 
quasi-intensive  particle  with  a  negative,  with  the  meaning  "(not) 
.  .  .  .  indeed  not" — supposing  it  to  have  had  that  meaning 
originally  —  could  acquire  a  purely  intensive  (positive)  force, 
without  being  used  as  a  true  negative  expressing  with  the  pre- 
ceding negative  a  simple  strong  negation.  But  a  collocation  of 
two  negatives  in  the  sense  of  one  probably  does  not  occur  in 
Sanskrit,' and  in  fact  a  "not  —  not,"  such  as  this  would  be,  is 
impossible  anywhere.' 

'  Delbriick,  Syn.  Forsch.,  V,  544;   Eva  Channing,  J.A.O.S.,  13,  XCIX. 

'A  distinction  is  to  be  made  between  collocations  of  true  negatives  with 
the  meaning  of  one  and  those  which  historically  are  collocations  of  negative 
and  int^sive,  the  intensive  having  acquired  a  negative  force.  True  double 
negatives  are  separated  in  their  application.  In  general  one  negatives  the  sen- 
tence, while  the  other  is  felt  with  an  important  word.  The  most  common  case 
is  that  in  which  a  second  negative  is  used  to  negative  an  indefinite  pronoun  or 
adverb,  e.  g.,  A^o  one  shan't  do  it;  iVon  miseret  neminis,  Enn.  Erecth.,  frag. 
4;  Jura  te  nocitnruni  nan  esse  hoinini  de  hac  re  nemini.  Plant ,  Mil  ,  1411  ;  to. 
■y'  OX)  k4  Tis  ovd^  tdoiTo,  Od.,  8,  280.  Very  often  the  negative  and  the  indefinite 
form  a  compound.  But  a  negative  may  be  felt  to  belong  to  any  important 
word  and  so  two  negatives  be  admitted,  e.  g.,  O.E.,  TAer  nys  no  table;  N^eqiie 
nucleis  ad  oleam  ne  utatur,  Cato,  R.R.,  66.  The  need  felt  for  a  second  negative 
may  be  increased  if  one  of  the  negatives  is  a  conjunction,  if  the  negative  is 
compounded  with  a  verb,  or  if  a  number  of  words  intervenes  between  the  first 
negative  and  some  important  word.  But  these  causes  act  indirectly,  and  the 
second  negative  is  still  felt  with  some  important  word.  Of  a  different  sort  are 
double  negatives  arising  from  syntactical  contamination,  e.  g..  Forbade  the  boy 
he  should  not  pass  those  grounds,  Shaks.,  Passionate  Pilgrim.  For  other  exam- 
ples of  contamination  cf.  Strong,  Logeman,  and  Wheeler,  155,  and  for  other 
examples  of  true  double  negatives  cf.  Zimmer,  Streifzuge,  90 ;  Eva  Channing, 
J.A.O.S.,  12,  XCIX;  Gebauer,  Archiv  f.  Slav.  Phil.,  8,  177;  Kent,  Pub.  Mod. 
Lang.  Asso.,  5,  190;  Richardson,  Harvard  Studies,  I,  154;  Spurrel,  Welsh 
Grammar,  158;  Habich,  De  neg.  usu  Plaut.,  6;  Lucilius,  ed.  Miiller,  241.  But 
the  collocation  neqtie  .  .  .  haud  can  neither  be  classed  with  the  examples  of 
contamination,  as  Strong,  Logeman,  and  Wheeler,  nor  with  neque  .  .  .  num- 
quam,  as  Habich  would  have  it  (see  below  p.  27).  Habich's  separation  of 
neque  .  .  .  nuniqiiain  from  cases  like  non  .  .  .  nemini  seems  to  me  to  be  an 
arbitrary  classification. 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES  7 

In  favor  of  the  second  explanation,  that  proposed  by  Per 
Persson,  are  the  numerous  analogies  furnished  by  negatives 
which  have  become  such  from  being  used  to  intensify  negatives. 
The  fact,  too,  that  the  use  of  cand  as  a  positive  intensive  dies  out 
in  the  later  Vedic  period,  except  with  derivatives  of  ka,  indicates 
that  the  development  was  from  positive  to  negative.  It  may  well 
be,  however,  that  the  resemblance  in  form  of  cand,  "indeed,"  and 
ca  .  .  .  na,  "and  not,"  assisted  in  the  development  of  meaning 
of  the  former.  The  correspondences  of  ca/id  elsewhere  speak 
strongly  for  the  positive  as  the  original  force  of  the  word  ;  com- 
pare Av.  cij/a,  O.H.G.  -gin,  "irgend,"  O.N.  -gt.^  Only  in  the  last 
does  a  negative  meaning  appear,  and  there  the  other  Germanic 
dialects  show  the  negative  meaning  to  be  a  developed  one. 

Skr.  nil  as  a  negative  was  mostly  used  with  cid  (iiu  cid, 
"never "),/.  ^.,  y/// was  a  temporal  negative  adverb.  The  more 
common  and  doubtless  earlier  meaning  of  nu  was  "now,"  with 
which  meaning,  or  with  one  easily  connected  therewith,  its  cog- 
nates appear  in  various  languages  :  Gr.  vv,  Lat.  nu-(dins),  O.Ir. 
nu  no,  O.H.G.  nii  no,  Lith.  nu-gi,  and  in  Umb.  nurpener'^  (from 
mc-arpener).  In  Sanskrit  it  is  found  used  with  a  force  easily 
derivable  from  that  of  the  temporal  adverb,  viz.,  as  an  intensive  : 
nd  nu  nami,  "surely  not."^  It  was  undoubtedly  from  this  use  as 
an  intensive  that  the  negative  force  came  to  be  attached  to  the 
nu*  in  the  same  way  in  which  Yxtnch. pas  became  negative.  Other 
analogies  will  be  given  under  the  Greek  negatives. 

Skr.  a-  an-  (negative  prefix),  I.E.  //-  nn-. 


AVESTAN. 

Av.  md,  I.E.  me. 

Av.  mott  is  formed  by  the  addition  to  md  of  the  particle  //,  as 
in   the  case   of  noit  (Skr.  ned,  Aryan  naid).     Probably,  however, 

'  Cf.  Brugmann,  II,  241  ;  Hiibschmann,  K.Z.,  24,  328,  n.  2  ;  Bartholomae, 
Arische  Forsch.,  II,  126;  Jackson,  Av.  Gram.,  §30;  Per  Persson  as  above; 
Scherer,  Z.G.D.S.,  475.  But  Goth,  -huti  is  probably  from  I.E.  stem  q7t-;  J. 
Schmidt,  K.Z.,  32,  402. 

^Brugmann,  Osk.  und  Umbr.,  225  f.  In  regard  to  Umbr.  nosve  see  below 
(P-  29). 

^ E.  g.,  R.V.,  I,  165,  9,  ndki?-  nit  na  tvdtidtti  asti.  For  the  use  of  the  tem- 
poral adverb  as  an  intensive  cf.  Eng.  7iever  emphatic  for  no. 

"^But  cf.  Kretschmer,  K.Z.,  31,  365. 


8  NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

it  was  formed  after  the  analogy  of  noit  rather  than  by  a  direct 
union  of  the  elements  ma  and  //. 

In  Av.  i/uuta  is  to  be  seen  md  -j-  a  pronominal  stem  (ta  (I.E. 
da),  as  in  iiae-cta  (I.E.  nei  or  noi  A;-  da). 

I.E.  //r  probably  does  not  occur  in  Av.  except  in  compounds. 
The  single  place  in  which  it  has  been  supposed  to  occur  is  Yasna, 
44,  19.  Tradition,  however,  has  taken  the  word  nd  here  as  the 
nominative  of  nar,  "man,"  and  it  seems  hardly  probable  that 
this  negative  should  occur  once  and  only  once  in  the  entire  lit- 
erature. The  common  «<?// appears  in  the  preceding  line.  The 
absence  of  the  uncompounded  nd  in  O.P.  also  argues  somewhat 
against  the  supposition  of  its  appearance  here.' 

The  common  negative  both  in  the  Gathas  and  later  Avesta  is 
noit^,  corresponding  to  Skr.  ned. 

I.E.  ne  further  appears  in  the  compound  nava  of  the  later 
Avesta  and  navdt,  "minime,"  "neither,"  of  the  Gathas. 

A  v.  nae-,  I.E.  nei  or  noi. 

Av.  naetta  (Gatha  nai'da)  is  I.E.  nei  or  noi  strengthened  by  -da"" 
(cf.  madd).  It  could  hardlv  be  the  more  common  /loit  with  added 
-a,  as  this  is  properly  a  postposition  which  becomes  attached  to 
cases. ^  A  remnant  of  the  (probably  Avestan)  use  of  nae  as  an 
independent  negative  adverb  is  seen  in  nae-cis,  "no  one." 

Av.  a-  an-  (negative  prefix),  I.E.  n-  nn-. 

In  a  few  cases  also  a  prefix  a/ia-  occurs  —  in  ana-lTareta,  ana- 
h'arepa,  anazdpa,  anamarezdika.  If,  as  has  been  claimed  above, 
the  I.E.  negative  prefixes  ;/  n,  indicated  by  the  ordinarv  negative 
prefixes  of  the  various  languages,  are  simply  the  weak  ablaut  forms 
of  I.E.  ne  ne  no  no,  then,  it  is  plain,  we  must  seek  an  explanation 
for  Av.  ana-  other  than  as  a  variant  form''  of  I.E.  //  n.  The  dis- 
svllabic  forms  of  the  several  languages  must  be  considered  together. 
In  Ossetan^  the  common  negative  prefix  is  ana-,  though  a-  also 
occurs  ;  in  Gr.  we  have  a  few  cases  of  dva-,  dva/reATTTos,  dvd/reSvos, 
etc.;   in  Prakrit  Goldschmidt*  has  noted  several  cases  of  ana-;   in 

'  Cf.  Jolly,  Ver.  Syn.,  33  ;   Spiegel,  Conim.  2,  358. 
»  Cf.  Per  Persson,  I.F.,  249. 

3  Jackson,  Av.  Gram.,  222;  Johansson,  B.B.,  20,  96. 

^Cf.  Johansson,  B.B.,  15,  310;  J.  Schmidt,  K.Z.,  23,  273 ;  Kretschmer, 
K.Z.,  31,  408. 

sHiibschmann,  Osset.  Spr.,  21. 
'K.Z.,  24,  426. 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES  9 

O.H.G.  we  have  the  single  case  of  una-  in  una-Jwlda;  and  Zim- 
mer'  has  claimed  that  ana-  appears  in  the  Celtic  an-.  The 
O.H.G.  una-  indicates  that  the  first  element  was  I.E.  nn-,  and  the 
simplest  explanation  of  the  presence  of  the  -a-,  in  most  cases  at 
least,  is  that  it  has  been  "clipped"  from  the  nouns  having  a- 
initial.  The  process  may  have  taken  place  in  proethnic  times  or, 
more  probably,  in  the  separate  developments.  An  example  of 
such  a  clipping  may  be  seen  in  Mod.Ir.  am-h-.^  For  the  Celtic 
Zimnier  supposes  that  ana-  arose  before  sonants  [cf.  O.Ir.  bunad, 
Lat.  fundus). 

OLD     PERSIAN. 

O.P.  md,  I.E.  7ne. 

O.P.  mdtya,  "that  not,"  is  md  -\-  -tya,  the  neuter  accusative  of 
a  relative  stem.^ 

O.P.  naiy,  I.E.  net  or  noi. 

O.P.  naiy  may  be,  however,  from  Aryan  naid  (Skr.  ned,  Av. 
noih.  The  presence  in  Iranian  of  I.E.  nei  not,  in  Av.  naeda  and 
nae-cis,  favors  the  connection  with  I.E.  nei  or  noi. 

O.P.  a-  (negative  prefix),  I.E.  //-. 


ARMENIAN. 

Arm.  mi,  I.E.  me.'' 

This  is  the  only  one  of  the  I.E.  negatives  appearing  in  Arm. 

The  ordinary  negative  in  Arm.  is  oc,  and  the  modern  language 
has  also  ce.  The  connection^  of  Arm.  o(  and  Gr.  ovk  has  been 
disputed  by  Hiibschmann.  Lagarde,  however,  connected  the 
two  negatives,  and  Bugge  has  done  the  same,  seeing  no  difficulty 
in  the  Arm.  -^  and  deriving  the  Arm.  o-  from  o-  from  au,  which 
he  takes  as  an  ablaut  form*  of  the  ou  in  Gr.  ovk. 

Inasmuch  as  Gr.  ovk  is  made  up  of  ov  and  an  added  element 
-k{i),  the   consideration   of   the  connection  of    the  two  negatives 

'K.Z.,  24,  523  f. 

^  Cf.  Zimmer,  K.Z.,  24,  536.  In  Gr.  avdivoLvos,  v^voivos,  diroii/a,  and  rrotv^ 
are  to  be  noted. 

3  Spiegel,  Keilinschriften,  1S2;  ^Yhitnev,  499  <?. 

^Brugmann,  I,  71  ;   Hiibschmann,  Arm.  Studien,  46  and  61. 

5  Cy.  Hiibschmann,  Arm.  Stud.;  Lagarde,  Arm.  Stud.;  Bartholomae,  Indg. 
Studien,  H,  20  f.;  Bugge,  K.Z.,  32,  30. 

^  Cf.  Brugmann,  H,  114;  Wackernagel,  K.Z.,  29,  141  ;  Solmsen,  2'iid.,  92; 
and  Prellwitz,  s/t/>.  v.  ov  ovk. 


(   uNlVERSi 


10        NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

really  involves  two  questions,  viz.,  as  to  the  connection  of  Arm. 
0-  and  Gr.  ov,  and  of  Arm.  -(  and  (Ir.  k(i). 

Bartholoniae  has  shown  that  Arm.  "(.  may  be  from  qi,  but  not 
ki.  So  -"(  in  o"(  might  well  be  for  -*qi,  used  before  words  begin- 
ning with  a  vowel,  and  hence  to  be  connected  with  the  I.E. 
interrogative  indefinite  stem  qi  and  to  be  compared  quite  directly 
with  the  Skr.  indefinite  particle  cid,  Av.  cii,  O.P.  ciy.  The  ques- 
tion, then,  as  to  the  connection  of  Arm.  -f  and  Gr.  -K(t)  will 
depend  upon  what  we  consider  that  Gr.  -ki  represents. 

As  for  the  connection  between  o-  and  Gr.  ov-,  Bugge  would 
suppose  that  Arm.  o  represents  I.E.  au-,  and  that  the  relation  of 
the  two  particles  is  one  of  ablaut.  I  shall  try  to  show  that  Gr. 
ov  belonged  to  the  e:o  series. 

Bugge's  law  of  Arm.  o  from  I.E.  aij  would  not,  of  course, 
exclude  one  of  o  from  I.E.  oii  (or  eij).  Hiibschmann,  however, 
has  given  —  with  some  hesitation  —  the  representation  of  I.E.  oij. 
and  eif  in  Arm.  as  oy,  and  Bartholoniae  has  argued  for  this  view 
at  some  length.  But  the  question  is  not  so  thoroughly  settled 
that  we  can  overlook  the  comparison  of  Arm.  o(,  "not,"  with  Gr. 
ovK(t),  "not,"  as  tending  to  establish  a  law  of  Arm.  o  from  I.E. 
oij.  Further  to  be  taken  into  consideration  is  Arm.  jbuel,  beside 
Skr.  hdvanam,  Gr.  xocfos.  And  again,  if  Arm.  sork,  Skr.  (uskas, 
Gr.  awXeos,  and  Arm.  ostin,  Gr.  aiio-raAcos,  belong  to  the  a:o 
series,  why  may  not  Arm.  sork  and  osiin  represent  the  ci-grade  ?' 


GREEK. 

Gr.  /Ar/  (Elean  ju.a,  Boeotian  /xei),  I.E.  me. 

With -Se  iirj  formed  a  compound  /at^Sc,  meaning  either  "and 
not"  or  "not  even"  {cf.  orSe).  A  number  of  indefinite  pronouns 
and  adverbs  were  formed  from  (i)  /A17  and  (2)  /nr/Se.  The  second 
element  was  «/xds,  els,^  t«,  ercpos,  or  an  indefinite  adverb. 

■  Cf.  Arm.  loganol,  Gr.  \o{p)iu,  Lat.  lavere;  B.B.,  17,  123.  and  Thurneysen, 
K.Z.,  28,  154.  Bugge's  examples  are  as  follows  (K.Z.,  32,  29):  (i)  sork,  Skr 
t;uskas,  Av.  hu'ska,  O.P.  uska,  Lith.  sausas,  O.B.  sitchu,  O.E.  sear,Qx.  ava\^os ; 
(2)  os/in,  Gr.  av<TTa\4os,  a{>aTr)p6s;  (3)  doc,  Gr.  irKpavcKu;  (4)  oc,  Gr.  om,  cf.  Lat. 
hand  (:^aud?);  (5)  p'ok'r,  Lat.  paucus.  Cf.  further  Bartholomae,  B.B.,  XVII, 
100  f.;   Hiibschmann,  Arm.  Stud.,  59,  62,  78;  Osthoff,  Perfect,  484  ff. 

"Breal  (Mem.  Soc.  Ling.,  I,  205)  thinks  that  /urjSeis  and  oi)5e/s  contain  the 
pronominal  stem  do-,  a  supposition  quite  possible  if  we  consider  /i7?5e/s  and 
ovdih  by  themselves,  but  considered  in  connection  with  /aTj5a/i(5s,  etc.,  ixy)bb\m, 
fj.T]diiroTe,  etc.,  unlikely.  It  would  seem  that,  whatever  the  origin  of  ovdels  and 
^TjSe/s,  odeTva  is  to  l)e  in  some  way  connected  (cf.  Brugmann,  Gr.  Gr.,  §  94.) 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES         II 

I.E.  >ie  does  not  occur  in  Greek  as  a  negative  adverb  or  as  a 
negative  prefix.  The  words  so  explained  by  J.  Baunack'  are  to 
be  accounted  for  otherwise.  The  list  is  aveu,  dve/x,wAtos,  vUrap, 
vefipos,  and  veVoSes.  The  last  word  has  already  been  discussed  ; 
dvev,  which,  as  Baunack  supposes,  contains  two  negatives  —  a 
thing  thoroughly  improbable — ,  will  be  discussed  later  on  (p.  33). 
As  for  di/£/AwAtos  it  is  impossible  here  to  support  the  presence  of 
two  negative  prefixes  in  the  sense  of  one.  A  comparison  with 
avd€8vo<;  dvdeATTTos  is  useless,  for  here,  too,  we  cannot  suppose  two 
negatives,  and  the  prefix  dva-  is  to  be  explained  otherwise.^  The 
word  seems  to  be  connected  with  dvc/xos.^  As  for  veKxap,  the  word 
is  not  I.E.,  but  a  Semitic  loan  word  (Semitic  niqtar).''  With 
ve/3po<;,  which  Baunack  connects  with  /3opa,  must  be  considered 
ve/3pa$,  "fawn,"  "a  young  animal,"  ve^prj  (with  8opd),  "belonging 
to  a  fawn,"  ve^pL<i,  "a  fawn  skin."  The  absence  of  etymological 
connection  with  any  word  for  "deer"  and  the  more  general 
meaning  sometimes  attached  to  ve^pai^  indicate  that  the  original 
meaning  was  a  more  general  one  than  "fawn;"  but  that  the 
word  was  originally  an  adjective  there  is  no  indication.  Probably 
we  have  in  ve/3po<i  a  -ro-  suffix  and  the  other  words  formed  from 
this  by  analogy  —  v€fipa$  after  Troprai,  ve'yS/ois  after  Trdprts,  and  the 
meaning  later  changed  from  "fawn"  to  "fawn  skin"  (used  as  a 
garment).  Now  if  we  see  in  ve/?pos  ("*descendant,"  "*offspring") 
a  root  ned-,  we  shall  be  inclined  to  connect  this  with  the  root  uep- 
which  I  have  claimed  appears  in  vcVoSes,  etc.  A  root  not  difficult 
to  connect  with  these  in  meaning,  but  with  a  still  different  con- 
sonant, is  //efi/i-,  Skr.  /md/i-,  "to  rend  asunder,"  nabhaiia,  "a 
spring."* 

'Studien,  271  f.,  and  cf.  Brugmann,  Gr.  Gr.,  223;  Wheeler,  CI.  Review, 
III,  130,  and  Olavsky,  "Die  nhd.  Partikel  nicht,  etc.,"  reviewed  by  Michaelis, 
K.Z.,  VI,  309. 

"See  p.  8. 

3  Cf.  Prellwitz,  sub  v.  dve/xos. 

^  Cf.  Keller,  Lat.  Volksetymologie,  226,  and  the  index  ;  Muss-Arnolt,  Trans. 
Am.  Ph.  Assoc,  23,  143. 

5  Cf.  Hesych.  vi^paKcs  '  oi  dppeves  v€ttol  tGiv  dXeKTpvovwv. 

*  For  variations  in  root  determinatives  between/  —  />  cf.  Skr.  vepate.-  Lat. 
vibrare.  Per  Persson,  Wrzlw.,  49,  but  cf.  Fay,  A.J. P.,  73,  481.  Variation  between 
/,  h,  hh  is  to  be  seen,  e.  g.,  in  std-b-,  sta-bli-,  sta-p-.  Per  Persson,  59.  In  regard 
to  nep-  and  nebh-  cf.  Spiegel,  K.Z.,  13,  370,  and  19,  392.  See  also  Brugmann, 
I,  469,  7.  Lat.  tiefrens,  if  it  means  "young,"  may  also  belong  here,  in  which 
case  we  should  have  the  roots  nep-,  neb-,  nebh-  in  three  words  meaning  "offspring." 


12         NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

The  coniinon  negative  in  Greek  taking  the  place  of  the  lost 
I.E.  lie  is  ov,  the  origin  and  connection  of  which  has  never  been 
very  satisfactorily  explained.'  It  was  suggested  by  Bopp  ^  that 
Gr.  ov  is  connected  with  the  pronominal  stem  seen  in  Av.  ava. 
He  conceived  that  not  only  Gr.  ov,  but  Skr.  iia  and  other  nega- 
tives as  well,  had  developed  their  negative  meaning  from  a 
demonstrative  one  of  remoteness. 

The  most  serious  attempt  to  find  a  derivation  for  ov  has  been 
made  by  Henry,^  who  attempts  to  connect  ov  directly  with  the 
Skr.  preposition  ava-.  To  make  this  connection  Henry  sets  up 
oua-  as  the  I.E.  form  of  the  preposition,  and  by  so  doing  is  com- 
pelled both  to  reject  Brugmann's  law  of  the  Skr.  treatment  of 
I.E.  0  in  open  syllables,^  and,  on  account  of  Lat.  au-,  to  accept 
Thurneysen's^  law  of  oij  to  au  in  Lat.  That  a  prefix  with  a 
"sens  inversif "  may  become  practically  a  negative  prefix  mav  be 
admitted,  and  perhaps  the  best  example^  is  Lith.  be-,  O.B.  bez{ji)-^ 
used  as  a  negative  prefix,  compared  with  Skr.  bahis,  "  out,"  "  out- 
ward." But  there  is  no  example  by  an}  means  sure  of  a  case 
where  such  a  prefix  has  become  a  true  negative  adverb.''  Henry 
himself  intimates  that  the  strongest  argument  in  favor  of  his 
derivation  is  that  no  other  seems  to  be  at  hand. 

It  seems  certain  that  the  negative  meaning  of  Gr.  ov  is  an 
acquired  one.  This  being  so,  it  would  be  good  method,  if  we 
are  to  seek  a  derivation  for  ov,  to  note  the  ways  in  which  such  an 
acquisition  of  negative  force  has  been  made  in  the  case  of  other 
words  not  originally  negative.     We  may  classify  as  follows  : 

I.  Negatives  formed  by  composition   of  I.E.  me  or  iie  with 

'some  other  word  do  not   concern   us,  except  as  they  show  that 

with   negatives  intensives  were  often   used  which  sometimes  coa- 

'  Grimm,  Deutsche  Gram.,  Ill,  759,  and  Pott,  Ety.  Forsch.,  I,  405-8,  have 
discussed  the  origin  of  the  Gr.  negative,  but  hardly  in  a  way  satisfactory  to  the 
modern  philologist,     llartung's  explanation  (see  Bopp)  I  have  not  seen. 

^Ver.  Gram.,  Ill,  §§3/1,  379,  and  Scherer,  Z.G.D.S.,  331. 

3  Mem.  Soc.  Ling.,  6,  378,  and  (/.  Brugmann,  Gr.  Gr.,  §  164,  and  the  Nach- 
trage ;   Planer,  De  Neg.  Haud,  and  others. 

^See  now  Streitberg,  I.F.,  III,  364. 
5K.Z.,  28,  154  f. 

^  C/.  Lat.  ex/ex,  "  lawless  "  (Lucilius,  frag.  22,  Miiller),  Skr.  vi-hasta,  "with- 
out hands,"  etc.,  Skr.  tiir-bliara,  "  without  measure,"  etc. 
7  On  Alb.  -JT  see  p.  18. 


l/NIVERSITY 

NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES         1 3 

lesced    with   the   negative.       Examples   are   Skr.   name,    O.H.G. 
iiiwiht,  and  in  I.E  itself  nei. 

2.  Words  of  certain  seniasiological  categories  may  develop  a 
negative  meaning  from  the  original  :  {a)  Words  meaning  "away 
from,"  "other,"  or  the  like,  e.  g.,  M.H.G.  anders,  under,  mere  (in 
sense  of  "weiter"),  haz  znd  furdaz;"^  {b)  comparatives  or  superla- 
tives, or  even  positives,  having  a  diminutive  force,  e.  g.,  Lat. 
minus  and  minime  {minus  especially  in  quo  minus),  O.E.  med-  in 
med-wis,  etc.  It  is  to  be  noted  here,  however,  that,  possibly  with 
the  exception  of  Alb.  s  (Lat.  dis-  ?),  none  of  the  examples  shows 
the  development  of  a  full-fledged  negative  adverb. 

3.  Words  which  from  their  meaning  may  be  closely  connected 
with  a  negative  may  take  on  a  negative  force  not  by  development 
from  their  own  proper  meaning,  but  from  association.  These 
words  are  more  or  less  plainly  indefinite  pronouns  or  adverbs, 
and  at  the  same  time  more  or  less  plainly  intensives  of  the  nega- 
tive with  which  they  are  used."  The  following  is  a  list  of  nega- 
tive pronouns  and  adverbs  which  have  become  negative  by  asso- 
ciation.    Doubtless  others  could  be  added. ^ 

In  M.H.G.''  dekein,  kein,  and  deiveder  could  be  used  either 
with  or  without  ;/////  to  give  a  negative  force  to  the  sentence ; 
hence  the  negative  force  oi  kcin  and  weder  in  N.H.G.  In  O.N. 
en-ge,  "Niemand"  {cf.  Goth,  ni  ains-liun),  man{n)-ge,  "Niemand," 
hver-ge,  "nirgends"  {cf.  O.S.  ///  hver-gin),  and  vaettr,  "nichts," 
but  also  "etwas"  {cf.  Goth.  ///  ivaihts).  In  O.Bohemian  =  srt;^;^)' 
from  meaning  "  desideratus "  came  to  mean  "nullus,"and  kto 
from  meaning  "  aliquis"  came  to  mean  "  nemo."  \xv  0.\x.  nach 
na,  "ullus"  "aliquis,"  is  also  found  with  meaning  "nullus."  In 
Welsh*  nef,  dim,  and  byih  are   either   positive   or  negative  indefi- 

'  Paul,  M.H.G.  Gram.,  125.  In  Albanian  -s  (-z)  became  a  quite  commonly- 
used  negative,  and,  if  it  were  really  from  Lat.  dis-,  would  be  the  best  example 
of  this  sort  of  development.  Particles  giving  a  bad  signification  may  deserve 
mention  here.      Cf.  Skr.  dtis-,  Gr.  dvs-,  Arm.  t-;  O.Ir.  7?n-,  Germ.  Jtiiss-. 

^No  line  can  be  drawn  between  the  two  classes.  It  is  to  be  noted,  too, 
that  some  nouns,  e.  g.,  res  and  homo,  may  be  used  practically  as  indefinite  pro- 
nouns. 

3  Cf.  Paul,  M.H.D.  Gram.,  124. 

*  Cf.  Grimm,  Deutsche  Gram.,  Ill,  720 ;  Paul,  M.H.D.  Gram.,  125;  and 
Hahn,  M.H.D.  Gram.,  §  435  f. 

sGebauer,  Archiv  f.  Slav.  Phil.,  7,  i88. 

*Spurrel,  Welsh  Gram.,  159. 


14        NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

nites.  French  rien,  "nothing,"  (Lat.  rem)  got  its  negative  mean- 
ing from  association. 

Skr.  ////,  "not,"  >iu  cid,  "never,"  I  have  mentioned  above  as 
takinir  its  resrular  force  from  association  with  na.  I  have  also 
followed  Per  Persson  in  supposing  a  similar  origin  of  the  negative 
force  in  Skr.  cafid.  Lat.  hat/d,  which  I  believe  belongs  here,  will 
be  discussed  below.  French  /^as'^  and  point  are  well  known  as 
examples  of  this  phenomenon.  Italian  mica  miga,  Proventpal 
Plica  j/iiga  mia,  O.French  mie'^  (Lat.  mica^  show  the  same  shift  in 
meaning  as  pas  and  point.  Modern  Gr.  StdAoi;  has  its  negative 
meaning  from  use  as  intensive  to  a  negative. 

It  is  to  be  noted,  then,  that  the  use  of  intensives  with  nega- 
tives is  common;  that  sometimes  this  intensive  united  with  the 
negative  to  form  a  compound  ;  but  that  it  quite  frequently  became 
a  negative  itself;  and  that  of  negative  adverbs  not  connected  with 
VIC  or  ne,  and  whose  etymology  we  know,  all,  with  the  possible 
exception  of  Alb.  -s,  came  into  use  as  intensives  to  negatives.^  We 
should  do  well,  then,  to  suppose  that  the  same  thing  took  place 
in  the  case  of  Gr.  ov  which  we  know  took  place  in  the  case  of 
French  pas.'^ 

In  searching  for  a  connection  for  Gr.  ov  among  words  that 
could  be  used  as  intensives  we  will  hardly  find  the  object  of  our 
search  among  the  names  of  diminutive  objects  {passus,  whit,  etc.), 
but  rather  among  more  generally  used  intensives,  more  or  less 
closely  connected  with  pronominal  stems  like  Skr.  ////  and  I.E. 
'i.      Such  a  particle  seems  to  be  at  hand  in  the  Skr.  u? 

'  In  the  Creole  of  the  Antilles  French  ne  has  entirely  disappeared,  and  pa  by 
itself  is  the  ordinary  word  for  "not."  Cf.  de  Poyen-Bellisle,  "  Les  Sons  et  les 
Formes  du  Creole  dans  les  Antilles,  50. 

2  O'Connor,  A.I. P.,  2,  210. 

3  The  development  of  the  conjunctionally  used  negatives,  Goth. //^<7/  and 
O.^.jeda,  is  in  reality  the  syntactical  development  of  the  clauses  introduced  by 
those  particles.  Probably  in  both  of  these  cases  the  development  was  from  an 
indirect  question  to  a  clause  of  fear  to  a  final  clause. 

*  On  the  general  connection  between  intensives  and  negatives  cf.  Strong, 
Logeman,  and  Wheeler,  Hist,  of  Lang.,  102.  Other  words  may  obtain  a  new 
force  in  the  same  way  —  cf.  the  Italian  cosa  with  interrogative  force  from  use 
with  die. 

5  On  this  particle  cf.  Fick,  B.B.,  7,  270  ;  Osthoff,  Perf.,  328,  M.U.,  4,  253  ; 
Delbriick,  Syn.  Forsch.,  5,  504  f.;  Brugmann,  Gr.  Gr.,  224;  Kretschmer,  K.Z., 
31,  364;  etc. 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES         15 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  original  meaning  and  function  of 
the  I.E.  u,  the  value  indicated  for  it  by  the  separate  languages  is 
simply  that  of  a  particle  with  no  more  definite  value  than  that  of 
a  mere  intensive  or  at  most  of  a  demonstrative.  In  general  it  is 
very  similar  to  /.  In  giving  the  occurrences  I  assume  that  the 
word  belongs  in  the  e:o  ablaut  series.'  For  the  positive  side  of 
the  argument  in  favor  of  this  the  examples  given  will  themselves 
be  all  the  evidence  obtainable.  It  may  be  noted  here,  however, 
that  the  supposition  that  a  given  weak  form  belongs  in  the  e.o 
series  is  antecedently  more  probable  than  that  it  belongs  to  any 
other.* 

The  particle  in  proethnic  times  could  become  attached  to 
words.  The  locative  plural  endings  -si  and  -sii  were  evidently 
formed  from  -i'  by  the  additions  of  the  particles  -/  and  -21?  Bar- 
tholomae"*  supposes  also  that  there  was  a  locative  singular  suffix  -u 
beside  that  in  -/.  The  examples,  though  few  and  only  adverbs, 
show  an  I.E.  use  of  the  particle  whether  the  words  affected  were 
full-fledged  case  forms  or  not. 

The  union  of  -//  with  the  pronoun  so-  is  doubtless  I.E.^  This 
use  of  -u  is  paralleled  by  the  more  frequent  employment  of  -/  in 
the  formation  of  pronouns  :   Lat.  qui,  etc.* 

The  particle  was  attached  to  the  third  person  singular  and 
plural  secondary  endings  {-t-ii,  -nf-u).'  Here,  too,  there  is  a 
parallelism  with  the  particle  -/,  if  it  is  the  latter  that  differentiates 
the  "primary"  from  the  "secondary"  endings.* 

'On  ablaut  of  particles  cf.  Osthoff,  Perfect.,  328,  and  Per  Persson,  I.F.,  200  f. 

^Osthoff  (Perf.  328),  however,  sees  the  strong  form  of  Skr.  u  in  Gr.  aJb,  and 
so  others  —  a  view  which  Brugmann  (Gr.  Gr.,  221)  questions  and  Kretschmer 
(K.Z.,  31,  364)  argues  against.  Sonne  (K.Z.,  12,  278)  suggests  the  comparison 
of  Gr.  aS  and  Skr.  o  (a  -\-ti);  cf.  Prellwitz,  sub  v.  aS  and  avepiw. 

3  Brugmann,  II,  356. 

^B.B.,  15,  23,  and  cf.  Brugmann,  II,  256,  Rem. 

5  Skr.  so  a-sdu  (for  both  genders),  Av.  haii  (for  both  genders),  O.P.  kauv 
{for  both  genders),  Gr.  ot-ros.  Cf.  Brugmann,  Gr.  Gr.,  130;  Delbriick,  Syn. 
Forsch.,  IV,  139;  Sonne,  K.Z.,  12,  270,  and  Windisch,  Curtius  Studien,  2,  263 
and  366  f.  It  is  possible  that  Gr.  ovTO'i  is  for  *so-ittos,  cf.  Skr.  uta,  but  the  other 
view  seems  preferable'.  The  use  of  i<  after  pronouns  and  even  between  pro- 
nouns is  common  in  Skr. 

*  Cf.  Per  Persson,  I.F.,  II,  247  f. 

^Brugmann,  II,  992,  1017  ;  Thurneysen,  K.Z.,  27,  174;  Hirt,  I.F.,  I,  206; 
Osthoff,  M.U.,  IV,  252,  257. 

*  Brugmann,  II,  909,  973. 


1 6         NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

An  I.E.  compound  arising  from  the  collocation  of  two  j)ar- 
ticles  is  to  be  seen  in  Skr.  o  (beside  the  simple  a),  C}r.  av.  Lat. 
au-t{i)  aii-tan,  Osc.  av-ti  av-ti,  Umbr.  u-te  o-tc,  Goth,  aii-k,  O.N. 
au-k,  O.E.  ed-c,  O.S.  o-k,  O.H.G.  ou-h.  I  shall  attempt  to  show 
(p.  2)'^)  that  the  Gr.,  Goth.,  and  O.H.G.  words  for  "without," 
av£v,  ifiu,  dno,  contain  the  particle  //-,  in  the  case  of  the  Gr.  in  the 
strong  form  en.  The  compound  would  be  of  much  the  same 
sort  as  the  one  just  mentioned.  If  I  am  right  in  claiming  that 
avev  contains  the  strong  form  of  I.E.  ii,  it  is  plain  the  particle 
belongs  in  the  e.o  ablaut  series,  and  forms  of  the  o-  grade  may  be 
expected. 

I.E.  //  appears  in  the  Skr.  intensive  and  conjunctional  par- 
ticle //,'  and  in  composition  in  san-ti-tar''  (beside  san-i-tur),  and 
ii-ta  —  an  Aryan  formation  (Av.  itfa,  O.P.  iita).  In  Gr.  the  weak 
form  of  the  particle  appears  in  itav-v^  and  the  o-  strong  grade 
form  probably  in  ovv.  In  Latin  our  particle  is  probably  to  be 
seen  in  )ie-u,  se-u,  ce-ii}  In  Goth.  -//  appears  as  an  interrogative 
particle^  and  in  connection  with  -h  i-uh)  as  a  conjunctional  and 
intensive  particle.  O.B.  u-  in  ii-lw  "oJv"  is  perhaps  to  be  com- 
pared with  Gr.  ov  of  ov-v. 

I  hold  it  to  be  reasonably  certain,  (i)  that  Gr.  ov  received  its 
negative  force  from  use  as  an  intensive,  (2)  that  the  particle  whose 
weak  form  is  it  was  capable  of  being  used  as  an  intensive,  and  (3) 
that  it  could  have  the  ablaut  form  oij.  Positive  evidence  in  Gr. 
itself  that  ov  did  so  get  its  negative  force  would  consist  of  a  use 
corresponding  to  the  common  one  of  (nc)  .  .  .  pas  in  French  ; 
but  one  negative  —  possibl}'  the  only  one  —  from  which  ov  derived 
its  negative  meaning  died  out  before  historical  times,  and  ov 
having  become  a  full-fledged  negative,  we  ought  not  to  expect  to 

'  Delbriick,  Syn.  Forsch.,  5,  504  f. 

*Gr.  fire/o,  Goth,  sundro,  etc.,  show  the  word  without  the  particle.  Arm.  ev 
probably  does  not  belong  here  ;  cf.  lliibschmann,  .\rm.  Stud.,  75  ;  Brugmann, 
1,63. 

3  0sthof£,  M.U.,  IV,  252;   Brugmann,  Gr.  Gr.,  130. 

■•  Of  these  neu  may  be  a  form  of  nL"ue,  but  sen  is  not  from  sl-ve,  and  cen  is 
unexplained.  Ce-ti  contains  the  pronominal  deictive  stem  ko-ke-  seen  in  ec-ce 
and  elsewhere,  and  sc-  in  sen  is  the  pronominal  stem  seen  in  the  preposition  se 
{sed),  "without,"  in  the  conjunction  5^</,  and  in  the  reflexive  pronoun  .ft',-  cf' 
Stolz,  Lat.  Gr.,  346;  Per  Persson,  I.F.,  II,  223;  v.  Planta,  145. 

^  Cf.,  however,  Liden  quoted  by  Per  Persson,  I.F.,  II,  213.  J.Schmidt 
(Vocalismus,  I,  152),  Sonne  (K.Z.,  XII,  289),  and  Scherer  (Z.G.D.S.,  374)  iden- 
tify Goth,  -u  and   Skr.    7/. 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES        17 

find  it  used  as  an  intensive,  except  perchance  in  some  construc- 
tion or  collocation  of  words  which  would  in  some  way  protect  ox 
from  being  taken  as  a  negative.' 

Strengthened  forms'"  of  Gr.  ov  are  ovkL  and  ov^i  and  their  ante- 
vocalic  forms  ovK  and  ov^-  Of  ovkL  and  oux'  it  is  possible  that 
only  ovKi  is  original,  and  that  ov^i  arose  by  a  sort  of  proportional 
analogy  between  ovk,  oix  (before  vowel  with  rough  breathing), 
and  ovKi.  More  probably,  however,  we  have  in  the  -xt  of  oix^  the 
correspondent  of  Skr.  ^/,3  Av.  zl*  "for,"  "certe,"  O.B.  zi,  I.E. 
^/il.  In  Skr.,  Av.,  and  O.B.  the  word  is  used  as  an  intensive;  so 
also  in  Gr.  besides  ovx^  in  17x1  and  vatxt- 

The  -Ki  of  ov-KL  is  generally  considered  as  the  same  particle 
that  appears  in  vat-Kt  and  7roXAa-Kt  and  other  multiplicatives. 
Wackernagel  and  J.  Schmidt  have  connected  this  with  Skr.  ci'd, 
I.E.  pronominal  stem  ^/-,  to  which  Brugmann  and  Osthoff 
objected  that  the  particle  would  appear  as  -n,  and  they  therefore 
connected  it  with  a  stem  h'.  It  can  hardly  be  claimed  that  the 
1/  element  of  the  velar  was  lost  in  enclisis,  as  Bechtel  has  sug- 
gested, and  so  that  dentalization  did  not  take  place,  for  we  should 
have  to  dispose  of  re,  Lat.  gue,  Skr.  ca,  and  besides  it  is  improb- 
able, though  not  impossible,  that  an  enclitic  word  should  have  a 
different  treatment  from  an  unaccented  syllable  (cf.  Trevre).^ 

Gr.  mt'/ct*  is  either  a  barbarism  for  vat'xt  or  a  transformation  of 

'  It  is  possible  that  we  are  to  see  survivals  of  the  original  force  of  ov  in  the 
collocation  ovk  oiv  (positive)  and  in  the  ov  ix-fj  constructions,  otherwise  explained 
by  Goodwin  (Moods  and  Tenses,  Appendix  II). 

2 Their  occurrences  in  Homer  are:  01),  1336;  ovk,  464;  ovx,  27;  ovkL,  15, 
and  ovx'i,  2  (0  716  =  IT  762).  Among  other  occurrences  of  ovxi-  Herodas  has 
twelve  cases  ;  cf.  Smyth,  Ionic  Dialect,  295. 

3  Osthoff,  M.U.,  IV,  239  f.;  Pott,  Wurzelworterbuch,  I,  1567. 

*  Av.  yezi  has  been  explained  by  Bartholomae  (Ar.  Forsch.,  II,  8,  n.  3,  and 
cf.  Osthoff,  M.U.,  4,240)  as  from  yad  +  zi  [i.  e.,  yadg/ii),  and  he  compares 
uzfdl>idi.  But  the  cases  are  not  necessarily  similar,  since  uziiii>{di  may  have 
been  formed  after  ud-  became  uz-  in  Av.  A  better  explanation,  it  seems  to  me, 
is  that  '^yedi,  "when,"  "  if,"  was  changed  to  yezi  under  the  influence  of  zi,  "  if," 
but  without  the  original  form  being  driven  entirely  out  of  existence,  so  that  we 
still  have  in  the  younger  Av.  yeiti,  "  if,"  the  direct  descendant  of  an  earlier  *j/,frt'/. 

5  Cf.  Wackernagel,  K.Z.,  25,  286  f.;  Osthoff,  M.U.,  IV,  241  f.;  J.  Schmidt, 
Pluralbildung,  252 ;  Bechtel,  Hauptprobleme,  354  ;  Brugmann,  II,  409,  Gr.  Gr., 
131;  Solmsen,  K.Z.,  33,  2981.;  de  Saussure,  Mem.  Soc.  Ling.,  6,  161  ;  and 
Buck,  I.F.,  4,  156. 

*  Aristophanes,  Thesm.,  1183,  1218. 


l8        NEGATIVES  OF  THE  E\'DO- EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

vaLxi.  under  the  influence  of  ovkL  The  -k-  in  ovkl,  in  the  -kl  of 
TToWaKt  and  other  multiplicatives,  and  that  in  the  troublesome 
indefinite  and  interrogative  forms  of  various  dialects,  probably 
have  a  common  explanation.  In  the  case  of  ovkl  considered  by 
itself  there  is  no  reason  for  not  supposing  that  the  -k-  is  from  an 
original  velar  after  the  ///  The  connection  of -k-  in  owi  with  a 
velar  is  preferable  for  several  reasons  :  i)  It  permits  of  a  direct 
connection  of  -kl  with  Skr.  c/d,  Av.  ci,  O.P.  ci'j,  which  have  a  sim- 
ilar use.  2)  The  I.E.  pronominal  stem  ki  is  rare,  and  we  have  no 
evidence  of  its  use  as  a  particle.  3)  Gr.  -kl  in  ovkl  will  then  be 
connected  directly  with  Arm.  (  of  of,  and,  if  Arm.  0  may  be  from 
I.E.  ou,  Gr.  ovKi,  "not,"  will  be  connected  directly  with  Arm.  of, 
"not." 

Considering  the  very  great  frequency  with  which  negatives 
are  used  with  indefinites,  there  seems  to  be  no  possible  objection 
to  supposing  with  Solmsen  that  the  -k-  of  the  troublesome  indefi- 
nite forms  arose  in  the  same  way  —  in  connection  with  ov.  And 
a  similar  explanation  is  at  hand  for  the  -kl  of  ttoXXolkl  and  other 
multiplicatives,  if  we  suppose  that  -kl  arose  in  *7roXv-KL  (I.E.  />//;? 
qi{d),  Skr.  puru  cid)  and  was  thence  transferred  to  a  stem  TroAAa- 
of  other  adverbs.  Having  become  established  as  a  multiplicative 
suffix,  it  was  added  also  to  stems  of  numerals,  possibly  displacing 
an  earlier  -Tt(s)  {cf.  Taren.  dixdTL<;,  "once")." 

The  compounds  formed  of  oi  and  8e  are  analogous  to  those 
formed  of  ixrj  and  8e. 

Gr.  av-3  a-  (negative  prefixes),  I.E.  //-  iin-. 

Gr.  vt]-,  Doric  vd  (negative  prefix),  I.E.  n. 


ALBANIAN. 

Alb.  mo-  (in  tuo-s),  I.E.  }>ie. 

Alb.  funge,  tunk,  nuk   Meyer  derives  from  the  Lat.  uuviquam. 

Alb.  .5-  (before  voiced   consonants  2)  Meyer  derives  from  Lat. 

'  Brugmann,  I,  427  ;  de  Saussure,  Mem.  Soc.  Ling.,  6,  161. 

*  Brugmann  now  accepts  the  view  that  the  -k-  of  TroXXd-Ki  and  of  the  indef- 
inites is  from  the  velar,  the  peculiar  treatment  being  due  to  enclisis.  He 
explains  the  dentalization  in  the  enclitic  Tk  a.s  due  to  the  retention  of  the  «  ele- 
ment of  the  particle  {ki,ie)  when  used  before  words  beginning  with  an  accented 
vowel  —  e  being  elided  and  ku-  really  forming  part  of  an  accented  syllable. 
Berichten  der  Konigl.  Sachs.  Gesellschaft  der  Wissenschaften,  1895,  32  f. 

'In  regard  to  a.va.-  cf.  p.  8. 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  lANGUAGES        19 

dis-.  But  this  -J"  is  the  same  that  appears  in  !no-s,^  which  would 
seem  to  preclude  the  possibility  of  a  connection  with  a  word  of 
negative  or  quasi-negative  meaning.  It  at  the  same  time  indi- 
cates that  the  origin  of  the  negative  s  was  in  an  intensive  to  a 
negative.     Compare  with  Alb.  mo-s:s  Skr.  nanu.nii  ("not"). 


LATIN . 

Lat.  ne,  I.E.  )ie. 

Lat.  ne  formed  various  compounds:  i)  Loose  compounds 
with  coxi]nwQ.\\ow%,  >iedii7n,  neve,  neu  ["^ lieu)  {y)\  2)  more  or  less 
close  compounds  with  various  indefinites,  necubi^  necunde,  neqiiis, 
with  conjunctional  force  of  ne ;  neqita/n,  nequiter,  nequitia,  neqiid- 
quatn,  and  ne  .  .  .  qiiidem,  in  which  ne  appears  with  no  conjunc- 
tional or  prohibitive  value. 

Lat.  ne,  I.E.  ne. 

The  simple  ne  written  as  a  separate  word  is,  of  course,  not 
common.^  But  the  ne-  in  nescio''  and  neqiieo  is  to  be  regarded  as 
the  retention  of  an  independent  negative  with  these  particular 
verbs,  and  the  conjunctional  negatives  neqiie  and  nisi^  show  the 
particle  restricted  in  application,  but  hardly  in  meaning.  I  pre- 
fer to  follow  O.  Brugmann^  in  deriving  nisi  from  nesei,  which 
form  appears  on  the  inscription  from  Spoleto.  It  is  hardly  pos- 
sible that  the  original  form  was  ^neisi'^  and  that  the  ei  I  has  been 
shortened  before  -si  as  an  enclitic.  Such  a  shortening,  especially 
in  dissyllabic  words,  seems  hardly  well  established.  Si>ie''  and 
qiioque^  cannot  be  adduced  as  examples.  It  would  seem  that  the 
law  of  shortening,  if  it  existed,  would  apply  to  neve  and  nidum 
as  readily  as  to  *neisi.  Moreover,  in  Sen.  Cons,  de  Bacch.,  which 
is  older  than  the  change  of  ei  to  /,  we  have  nisei.     The  change  of 

'  So  Meyer,  Alb.  Wort.,  sub  v.  mos. 

2  Lucan,  9,  1059,  shows  the  e  of  necubi  to  be  long. 

3  For  the  occurrences  of  ne  cf.  Lorenz'  note  to  Plautus,  Most.,  1 10  ;  Draeger, 
Hist.  Syn.,  I,  133  ;  and  Habich,  De  neg.  usu  Plaut. 

^  Nesapius  (Petronius,  50,  5)  is  formed  in  imitation  of  nescius  (from  nescio), 
cf.  also  Terentius  Scaurus,  De  orthogr.  Gr.  Lat.,  VII,  12,  4. 
SO.  Brugmann,  Ni.,  'i,-i„  and  cf.  Lindsav,  Lat.  Gr.,  611. 

*  Cf.  Wackernagel,  Gr.  Ak.,  22 ;  Skutsch,  Forsch.  Lat.  Gr.,  9,  and  the 
Nachtrage. 

7  Per  Persson,  I.F.,  2,  223,  n. 

*  Lindsay,  Lat.  Gr.,  598. 


20        NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

e  to  /  in  nisi  and  nihil  may  be  due  to  assimilation,  as  O.  Brug- 
mann  supposes,  or  to  a  lack  of  accent,  as  Lindsay  supposes  for 
nisi  and  Per  Persson'  for  sine  (from  '^se-ne),  ?nihi,  and  tibi,  or 
possibly  both  influences  may  have  operated  to  produce  the 
change. 

Ne  further  appears  compounded  with  another  particle  in  nee, 
**not."    The  form  nee  may  be  a  sentence  doublet  of  neqtie,  and  in 
its  use  as  conjunction  such  is  doubtless  the  case  ;  but  nee,  "non," 
has  generally^  been  explained  as  containing  a  particle  -ee.    Green- 
ough,3  however,  has  attempted  to  explain  this  use  of  nee  without 
separating  it  from  neque.     Whatever  may  be  said  of  the  possibil- 
ity of  such  a  genesis  as  Greenough  supposes  —  and   I   confess  it 
seems  to  me  extremely  improbable — ,  account  must  be  taken  of 
the  fact  that  neglego,  negotit/m,  neg  ritu  have  neg,  not  nee.     There 
is  no  way  of  explaining  a  change  of  e  to  g.     For  these  forms  it 
is  necessary  to  set  up  a  negative  neg,  and  for  this  further  support 
is   found   in  Latin   in   the  denominative  nego  and  in  Jiegumate{?). 
With  this  neg  is  to  be  compared  directly  Lith.  negi.     Further, 
Havet"  has   pointed    out   that   the  form  nee  of  XII  Tab.  may  as 
well  be  neg  as  nee,  and  the  same  is  true  of  the  passages  in  Cicero 
which   are   imitations   of  old   laws.     It   may  not   be  difficult  to 
understand,  too,  how  the   formulas  nee  opinans,  nee  reete,  nee  pro- 
cul,  res  nee  maneipi,  etc.,  remained  in  use  after  the  simple  neg  had 
nearly  or  completely  died   out.     The  -g  may  have  been  changed 
to  -e  through  influence  of   old  orthography  (legal  and  religious), 
or  through  influence  of  the  spoken  nee  conjunction  (compare  ^/^"^ 
ritu  and  nee  rite).    The  few  cases  =  which  cannot  be  considered  as 
stereotyped  formulas  may  show  either  the  retention  of  the  simple 
nee  {neg)  or  the  extension   of  use  from  the  stereotyped  formulas. 
The  very  few  cases  of  neque,  "non,"  may  be  the  result  of  a  still 
further  confusion   \iiee  ("and  not")  :  nee  ("not")  ::  neque  ("and 
not")  :  neque  ("not")],  or  more  probably  are  copyist  errors.* 

Quln  in  all  its  uses  has  commonly  been  derived  from  qui  and 

'  I.F.,  2,  223. 

2  C/.  liabich,  De  neg.  Plant.,  31  and  references. 

3  Harvard  Studies,  2,  129  f. 
*Mem.  Soc.  Ling.,  6,  118. 

5  For  examples  see  Greenough  and  Haliich  as  above. 

^  Cf.  Havet,  Mem.  Soc.  Ling.,  6,  118,  n.      Probably  -que  for  -c  is  to  be  seen 
in  the  form  '^doncque  (    >  doniqiie)  for  donee. 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES        21 

the  negative  >u\  but  Wharton  has  derived  the  conjunction  from 
qi/i  Ar  fii/m,  and  Per  Persson'  has  claimed  that  the  qulfi  of  alio- 
quifi,  ceteroqinn,  aiquiu,  and  hercle  qiiln  contains  the  positive  par- 
ticle ne. 

Sin  does  not  contain  a  negative.^ 

Ne  also  forms  negative  indefinite  adverbs  and  pronouns : 
neutiquam,  neutique  (late),  neuter,  nunquam,  nusquam,  niillus.  With 
the  exception  of  iiUllus  the  simplex  of  these  compounds  begins 
with  u-  from  I.E.  ^/^-,^and  the  initial  velar  should  appear  in  com- 
pounds as  in  ali-cubi  and  ne-cubi.  Neutiquam  and  neuter  may  be 
regarded  as  transforrnates  of  older  compounds  with  the  -c-  or  as 
being  formed  after  I.E.  qu-  had  become  u-.  The  existence  of  the 
form  necuter''  renders  the  first  supposition  probable  for  neuter. 
Moreover  neuter  in  contrast  to  neutiquam  was  pronounced  in  early- 
Latin  with  lieu-  forming  two  syllables. ^  It  was,  then,  a  compound 
transformed  from  the  compound  ne-cuter  under  the  influence  of 
the  simplex  uter.  The  absence  of  contraction  in  this  case  was 
due  probably  to  the  accent  on  the  ne.  Possibly  also  the  side 
form  tiecuter  exerted  an  influence. 

In  early  Latin  ?ieutiquam  was  regularly  pronounced  with  the 
first  syllable  short.*^  This  can  mean  nothing  else,  it  seems  to  me, 
than  that  neutiquam  was  a  collocation  of  two  words ^  and  so  pro- 
nounced with  elision  of  the  final  -e  or,  more  properly  speaking, 
with  slurring^  of  final  -e  and  initial  u-.  This  collocation,  formed 
simply  by  the  juxtaposition  of  negative  ne  and  the  indefinite  uti- 
quam,  remained  after  the  use  of  the  simplex  utiquam  had  died 
out.  Later  the  collocation  suffered  contraction  and  became  a 
compound. 

'  I.F.,  2,  212. 

2  Per  Persson,  I.F.,  2,  222. 

3  Cf.  J.  Schmidt,  K.Z.,  32,  394  f. 

^C.I.L.,  VI,  1527;  Lucretius,  4,  1217  (where  read  7iec,  not  7ieque),  5,  839; 
Mart.,  5,  20,  II.     Cf.  J.  Schmidt,  K.Z.,  32,  403. 

5  Lindsay,  Lat.  Lang.,  143. 

*  Lindsay,  Lat.  Lang.,  143  ;   Lorenz  to  Mil.,  631,  and  Brix  to  Capt.,  586. 

^  Otherwise,  Brugmann,  LF.,  6,  84. 

^  That  the  Romans  so  pronounced  is  indicated  by  analogies  of  modern 
speech.  Cf.  also  Probus  (apud  Gellius,  XIII,  21,  6),  who  says  that  turrim  had 
a  more  melodious  sound  than  tt<rrem  in  fitrrirn  in  pracipiti  stantem.  See  Lind- 
say, Lat.  Lang.,  144. 


2  2         NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  lANGUAGES 

In  the  case  of  iiuiiqiiam  and  fii/sqiui/n,  while  earlier  forms  with 
-cu-  may  have  existed,  the  compounds  as  thev  appear  have  no 
direct  connection  with  those  possible  earlier  forms.  Nuiiqiiam 
and  misgi/am  and  nullits  are  generally  considered  as  showing 
composition  with  elision  of  -e  of  the  negative.  The  other 
examples  given  by  Stolz'  as  showing  elision  may  be  explained 
otherwise.  Noetiian  will  be  treated  below,  /nltiqimm,  so  far  as  I 
know,  does  not  occur,  sorsus  is  from  *se-vorsus,''  and  sf/df/s  may 
have  been  formed  in  Italic  times  and  so  the  Fi  be  from  -on-  and 
that  from  -cu-.  An  explanation  of  iiitnqua7}i,  niisquam,  and  nul- 
lits which  should  not  need  to  suppose  an  elision  would  seem 
desirable.  In  the  case  of  nulliis,  since  Ulliis  never  had  an  initial 
consonant,  there  is  no  difficulty  in  supposing  it  to  be  from  *noul- 
lits  from  ^/le-iillits.  Later,  when  the  initial  of  ii?iqiiam  and  iisqitam 
came  to  agree  with  that  of  Ulliis — save  possibly  in  quantity  — 
/ii/nquam  and  iiiisquam  would  be  natural  analogical  formations  ^ 
{ulliis  :  iiullus  :;  iniqiiain  :  ininquaiii). 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  neither  ne  nor  ne  in  any  of  the  com- 
pounds mentioned  is  a  true  negative  prefix.  Each  is  used  to  form 
negative  indefinite  adverbs  or  pronouns.  Similarly  ne  enters  into 
the  compounds  nemo  and  nihiluvi  from  *jie-hemo*  and  *iie-h'ilum? 
But  we  have  two  or  three "^  words  which  appear  to  have  ne-  as  a 
prefix.  If  /lefrens  meant  "a  young  animal  just  weaned,"  it  may 
have  been  sorr^e  sort  of   a  corruption  of   Crr.  vey8/ods,  "a  fawn,"  or 

'  Lat.  Gr.,  276,  Anm.  Brugmann  (I.F.,  6.  80)  also  derives  nwnquaDt  from 
n  nnquam.  If  imtWangulus,  given  by  Brugmann,  I,  604,  and  iiiiiltanimis  were 
true  examples  of  elision,  they  would  not  really  affect  the  argument  here,  for 
these  words  are  compounds  of  another  sort — the  first  member  is  a  stem,  while 
compounds  of  ne  are  the  result  of  sentence  combination.  In  indipiscoi-,  indago, 
and  the  like,  the  first  member  had  lost  its  vowel  before  the  compound  was 
formed.  In  magtiopere  and  tantopere  we  can  hardlv  suppose  an  elision  of  a  long 
vowel. 

=  Solmsen,  Stud,  zur  lat.  Lautg.,  and  cf.  below,  p.  24. 

^  There  can  be  no  difficulty  with  the  length  of  the  vowels.  That  the  -u-  of 
iifillus  is  long  is  shown  by  C.I.L.,  X,  4787.  The  (juantitv  of  -//-  in  nunqiiam 
and  misquam  follows  either  that  of  nfillus  or  of  unqiniiii  and  iisqiiaiii. 

*■  Cf.  Havet,  Mem.  Soc.  Ling.,  5,  447,  who  thinks  that  niino  is  from  *ne/iei)io 
from  *nehotno,  but  that  a  simplex  /lei/io  (see  Festus,  no,  Miiller)  is  a  fiction  of 
Verrius  Flaccus. 

SBy  assimilation  of  vowels  as  in  nisi.  The  /,  beside  Julnm,  is  from  the  ?  of 
nihil,  which  was  shortened  after  the  dropping  of  -iiiii. 

*Lat.  nefrefis  {!),  "kidney,"  goes  with  Gr.  vi<ppoi,  etc.     Brugmann,  I,  423. 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES        23 


possibly  has  a  root,  I.E.  nebh-;''  but,  at  any  rate,  it  can  hardly 
mean  a  "not  eating  animal,"  for  it  was  applied  to  animals  ai  a 
time  when  they  began  to  eat." 

It  is  only^  in  nefas  and  its  connected  adjectives'*  that  we  have 
ne-  used  practically  as  a  true  negative  prefix.  But  doubtless  this 
was  originally  an  elliptical  expression  for  ne  fas  est,  used  at  first 
with  more  or  less  exclamatory  force  and  later  almost  as  a  true 
noun.  Its  original  character  may  be  indicated  by  its  frequent 
use  as  a  parenthetical  exclamation. ^  For  a  similar  development 
compare  >Tim~irum.     Somewhat  similar  are  Skr.  ndstika  and  itihasa. 

Lat.  no-  (in  tid-n{e)),  I.E.  no. 

Lat.  non  has  commonly  been  derived  from  noemitn  from  ne  -\- 
oinom.  The  derivation  is  impossible*^  on  phonetic  grounds,  if  we 
suppose  that  the  -0-  of  the  dipthong  is  short.  But  Solmsen,^  fol- 
lowing Thurneysen,  Kretschmer,  and  J.  Schmidt,  supposes  that 
the  result  of  the  contraction  of  7ie  and  oi/iom  was  noinom,  and  that 
this  long  dipthong  later  became  0.  Neither  of  these  changes  is 
well  supported. 

For  the  law  of  e-o  to  0  the  single  other  example  brought  for- 
ward is  nolo  from  nevolo,  and  the  validity  of  this  example  depends 
upon  the  law  which  Solmsen  tries  to  establish  of  the  dropping 
out  of  intervocalic  v  before  0  in  prehistoric  Latin.  For  this  last 
law  the  examples  given  are  as  follows  : 

i)  nolo,  etc. 

2)  deorsum,  seorsittn. 

3)  sol  <  *sdol  <  *sdz^ol  <  *sdul. 

4)  deus  <  *deivos,  Gnaeus  <  Gnaivos. 

5)  prdris  K prdvorJs  =  Gr.  irpiopa  <  Trpw/ratpa,  I.E.  J>iz'rid(l). 

I  may  be  permitted  to  give  reasons  for  thinking  that,  leaving 
'Cy.  p.  iiw. 

''References  in  P'orcellini. 

sHavet,  Mem.  Soc.  Ling.,  6,  108,  sees  ne-  in  necesse.  The  word  is  probably 
to  be  connected  with  Gr.  iveK-. 

'^On  confusion  of  derivatives  olfas  and/rtr«  see  Breal,  Mem.  Soc.  Ling.,  5, 
339.  The  words  seem  not  to  have  been  used  freely  before  Cicero,  yet  see  Cato, 
39,  12  ;  40,  7  ;  42,  7  (Jordan),  '\astud,  C.LL.,  I,  812,  Conway,  LF.,  4,  213,  takes 
as  castled  and  thinks  the  inscription  not  Latin. 

5  Catullus,  68,  91 ;  Vergil,  7,  73;  8,  688. 

*  But  cf.  Osthoff,  Arch.  Lat.  Lex.,  4,  459. 

7  Solmsen,  Stud,  zur  Lat.  Lautge.,  53  f.;  Kretschmer,  K.Z.,  314,  62;  J. 
Schmidt,  K.Z.,  32,  407. 


24        NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

nolo  out  of  account,  the  examples  given  lack  much  of  proving  the 
existence  of  the  law,  and,  that  so,  another  explanation  for  nolo  is 
desirable. 

Ft  oris,  if  it  really  occurred,  is  best  explained,  as  Solmsen  him- 
self thinks  probable,  as  for  prora  —  itself  borrowed  from  the  Gr. 
• — after  the  analogy  oi  puppis. 

Notwithstanding  the  Gr.  transcription  of  Gnaivos  without  a 
sign  for  v,  beside  'O/craomav  and  'AouevTivw  in  the  Monumentum 
Ancyranum,  the  v  in  the  word  cannot  have  had  a  different  treat- 
ment from  that  of  aevus,  avus,  fugitivus,  octavus,  etc.,  which 
Solmsen  necessarily  supposes  retained  their  -v-  until  after  v-o 
before  s  had  become  v-ti.^  And  the  same  remark  would  apply  to 
the  derivation  of  deiis  from  *detvos.^ 

Sol  has  been  derived  from  *sdvel  by  Schulze,^  which  deriva- 
tion would  fall  in  directly  with  Solmsen's  law"  of  ave  to  ao  to  o, 
were  it  not  for  novem,  pover,  which  show  that  ve  in  final  syllables 
following  the  accent  was  not  changed.  But  this  would  not  pre- 
vent sdvelis,  sdvel-em,  etc.,  from  becoming  soils,  solem,  etc.,  after 
which  the  nom.  sol  would  be  a  natural  analogical  formation. 

The  forms  deorsitm,  seorsum,  dorsum,  sorsum  are  best  taken  as 
formed  after  the  analogy  of  introrsus,  retrorsus,^  etc.,  and  the 
variation  as  due  to  the  influence  of  the  prepositions.  Solmsen 
himself  explains  the  late  extrorsum  and  iiltrorsum  by  analogy. 
So  also  horsiim  is  an  analogical  formation. 

The  presence  in  Plautus  of  nevoid  and  the  difificulty^  with  the 
eo  verbs  speak  somewhat  against  the  derivation  of  nolo  and  tiolini 
from  ne-volo,  nevelhn.  But  if  we  once  admit  the  presence  in  Lat. 
of  a  negative  no-,  the  easier  derivation  of  nolo  and  ndlim  is  from 

'  P.  45  f- 

^  Cf.  Bronisch,  Osk.  i-  und  ^-Vocale,  i8o,  n.;  Thurneysen,  K.Z.,  32,  558. 

3K.Z.,  27,  428. 

♦  P.  82  ff.  On  the  contraction  of  -ao-  cf.  Bartholomae,  Stud,  zur  idg. 
Sprachgeschichte,  II,  142,  and  Buck,  Osc.-Umbr.  Verb-system,  151. 

5  These  from  intro-ve-  by  change  of  -ve-  to  o  (Solmsen,  82  f.),  or  from 
intro-vo-,  v  being  dropped  between  like  vowels  {cf.  Solmsen,  109  f.).  I  see  no 
reason  why,  if  ovo  became  0,  eve  became  e,  ivi  became  1,  and  ava  d,  we  should 
not  suppose  that  ovo  became  0.  Both  forms,  dorsum  and  deorsuvi,  are  found  in 
Dec.  Min.,  C.I.L.,  i,  199.  The  contemporaneous  use  of  the  two  forms  indicates 
that  one  was  not  the  phonetic  development  of  the  other.  While  Plautus  has 
deorsttni,  it  is  always  dissyllabic.     {Cf.  Wagner  to  AuL,  365.) 

*  Solmsen  explains  this  chronologically. 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES        25 

*no-volo,   *>io-vclim,   or   ^iiovolim,   against   which   derivation    no 
phonetic  objections  can  be  raised. 

The  support  for  a  law  of  eo  to  0,  then,  seems  very  slight ;  but 
starting  from  a  form  iwiiiom  we  still  should  have  to  show  that  -oi- 
would  become  0  elsewhere  than  where  final.  Kretschmer's'  only 
example  in  support  of  the  law  he^idt?,  poti/s poailum  [cf.  '$ikx.pdy- 
dna-m),  which  counts  for  nothing  when  compared  with  Skr. 
pdtave  pdtra-m,  is  this  same  supposed  *//dinom  to  ndii{iim).  x\nd 
the  onlv  other  support  for  the  law  is  the  corresponding  supposed 
change  of  ov  to  r',^  which  Solmsen  himself  has  pretty  well  dis- 
posed of.  Schmidt^  has  added  o\i\y  prod-,  which  he  supposes 
from  *  pro-id.  This  is  possibly  an  ablative  case  form,  or  has  its 
-d  from  words  beginning  with  that  letter,  to  which  it  was  pre- 
fixed. The  probable  explanation,  however,  is  that  prod-  is  after 
the  analogy  of  ind-  and  other  prepositions  ending  in  -d  {postid, 
antid,  red),  a  transformation  favored  by  the  proportion  ///- :  ind-  '.'. 
pro-: prod-.  Solmsen  suggests  promo  as  a  further  example.  But 
this  is  to  be  explained  as  a  transformation  oi*proemo  {ov  *prumo) 
under  the  influence  of  pro.  The  meanings  of  the  simple  verb 
and  the  compound  had  ceased  to  indicate  the  connection  of  the 
two  words,  while  in  the  compound  the  idea  oi pro  was  very  appar- 
ent. In  much  the  same  way  coemo  {^cFimo)  became  cdtno,  with 
the  meaning  "to  bring  together,"  while,  when  the  compound  had 
the  meaning  of  the  simplex,  the  form  coemo  was  retained  without 
even  contraction  taking  place.  In  the  case  of  promo  demo  may 
have  assisted  in  the  transformation.  The  same  sort  of  transfor- 
mation as  in  promo  and  como  is  to  be  seen  in  sumo  and  probably 
in  dego,''  beside  deamdre,  etc. 

The  fact  is  that  this  derivation  of  nofi  from  uoinum,  supported 
by  that  of  nolo  from  *nevolo,  has  been  the  mainstay  of  all  three 
suppositions  just  discussed.     But  even   if   it  were  perfectly  sure 

'  K.Z.,  31,  462. 

^And  cf.  Buck,  Osk.  Voc,  163;  Brugmann,  Die  Ausdriicke  fiir  den  Begriff 
der  Totalitat,  54  ff. 

3K.Z.,  32,  407. 

"•  Otherwise  Stolz,  Hist.  Gr.,  219,  who  considers  coino  as  well  as  lic'go  due  to 
a  regular  contraction.  But  for  coind  at  least  we  cannot  suppose  that  the  result 
of  the  contraction  of  o  e  was  affected  by  the  fact  that  the  first  vowel  belonged 
to  the  preposition  co-.  The  length  of  the  vowel  in  como  may  be  due  to  promo 
and  demo,  or  to  the  form  —  *coemo  —  of  which  it  was  a  transformate,  or  to  both 
causes. 


26        NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

that  e-oi  could  become  oi  and  oi  o,  we  should  still  have  to  explain 
how,  if  noetntin  became  iion,  it  also  remained.  We  have  two  cases 
of  noemnn  in  Lucretius  (III,  198,  and  IV,  712),  though  Plautus, 
a  century  and  a  half  before,  used  iion  far  more  often  than  noe- 
fiiim.^  And  while  we  find  noenian  in  the  early  literature  —  not, 
however,  in  inscriptions  —  beside  the  far  more  common  fioii,  we 
have  no  trace  whatever  of  an  intermediate  form  other  than  the 
dropping  of  final  -m.  I  derive,  then,  Lat.  noii  from  *no-n{eY  as 
qiiln  from  *qtii-/i[e),  and  nolo  from  *no-voio  as  prorsus  from  pro- 
vorsiis. 

The  evidence  for  an  I.E.  form  no  may  be  summarized  here. 
Representatives  of  I.E.  noi  are,  of  course,  evidence  of  the  exist- 
ence of  an  I.E.  no.  The  words  which,  as  1  believe,  must  be 
explained  as  containing  I.E.  no  are  Lat.  non  and  nolo  just  dis- 
cussed, Umbr.  no-svc,  O.Ir.  nd.  Either  I.E.  no  or  ne  or  both 
may  be  seen  in  Aryan  nd  and  its  compounds.  Forms  to  be 
explained  as  containing  I.E.  noi  are  Lat.  (Duenos)  >ioi-si\  Lat. 
nocniim,  Lith.  nai-kal(  and  nai-kinu.  Either  I.E.  noi  or  nei  may 
be  seen  in  Av.  nae-cis  nae-ita,  O.P.  naiy,  O.B.  ///.  Leaving  out  of 
account,  then,  Aryan,  which  furnishes  as  much  evidence  for  the 
no  forms  as  for  the  ne,  and  Arm.,  Gr.,  and  Alb.,  which  furnish  no 
evidence  for  either,  we  have  evidence  for  I.E.  no  in  Italic,  Celtic, 
and  Balto-Slavic,  while  for  I.E.  ne  we  have  evidence  in  Italic, 
Celtic,  Germanic,  and  Balto-Slavic. 

Lat.  nei  nl,  I.E.  nei. 

Besides  the  independent  nei  ni  the  word  appears  in  nlm'irum, 
but  not  as  a  negative  prefix.  The  word  is  an  "elliptic  paratactic 
protasis  '  non  est  nuriim.'  "  ^ 

Lat.  noi  {\n  noe-ninn  and  /loi-si  {T>\\tno?,)),  I.E.  noi. 

The  common  derivation  of  noenum  noefiK*  from  ?ie-oinom  can 
only  be   made  by  supposing  an  elision  in  n{e) ;  but  if   I   am  cor- 

'  Plautus  probably  wrote  noenum  in  a  good  many  places  in  which  it  has 
disappeared  from  the  text.  Cf.  Habich,  De  neg.  usu  Plaut.,  35  ;  Wagner  to 
Aul.,  67  ;   Brix  to  Mil.,  653. 

-  The  above  is  in  practical  agreement  with  the  derivation  of  non  given  by 
Wharton  (Ety.  Lat.)  and  with  the  discussion  of  non  and  noenum  by  Thomas 
(Class.  Review,  5,  378,  434;  6,  194).  C/.  further  Wackernagel,  Gr.  Akzent,  19, 
n.;  Stolz,  Hist.  Gr.,  130,  and  Brugmann,  I.F.,  6,  80.  My  discussion  was  written 
some  two  years  ago  and  before  Mr.  Thomas'  article  had  come  under  my  notice. 

3  So  O.  Brugmann,  Ni,  19,  and  I  have  explained  nefas  similarly. 

■•  The  forms  ninum  and  tienii  are  doubtless  editor  etymologies. 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES         27 

rect  above  in  regard  to  fiiiwtpiam  and  n usq  11  am,  snch.  an  elision  in 
sentence  combination  is  unsupported.  If  /loe/ium  is  from  I.E. 
noi-,  the  second  element  is  to  be  connected  with  the  pronominal 
stem  no-  or  «//-,and  in  either  case  with  Lat.  tiiim!^ 

Unless  Duenos  noisi^  is  simply  a  dialectic  variation  of  tiei,  we 
have  in  the  word  another  evidence  of  I.E.  noi  in  Latin.  Solm- 
sen's''  objection  to  the  view  that  noi  is  an  ablaut  form  of  nei,  on 
the  ground  that  there  is  no  support  for  the  form  in  related  lan- 
guages, amounts  to  little,  even  if  the  fact  were  exactly  so,  if  it  can 
be  shown  that  representatives  of  an  I.E,  no  existed. 

The  negative  hand  has  been  connected  by  Corssen  and  others 
with  Skr.  ava  and  the  negative  force  derived  from  the  preposi- 
tional. 

The  final  -d  after  the  diphthong  is  in  itself  peculiar.  It  can 
hardly  be  an  original  d.  But  if  we  take  haut^  as  the  more  original 
form,  it  is  easy  to  suppose  that  hat/d  dccost  by  assimilation,  after 
the  law  of  the  dropping  of  final  -d  had  ceased  to  work,  and  that 
then  -//was  retained  in  certain  sentence  combinations  and  dropped 
in  others  (before  consonants  —  cf.  se-pono  from  sed-pono).  The  h- 
may  not  be  etymological,  and,  rejecting  this,  we  arrive  at  a  form 
aiit  identical  with  the  conjunction  aii-t,''  "or."  The  original 
meaning  of  the  particle  aii-t,  as  indicated  by  Skr.  0,  Gr.  au,  Lat. 
fl/z-Zi^w,  was  "further,"  "again,"  and  I  see  no  great  difficulty  in 
supposing  that  this  aut  was  used  with  a  negative  as  intensive ^ 
{nan  aut,  "not  again,"  "not  at  all"),  and  that  thence  the  negative 
idea  became  attached  to  the  word.*^  The  weak  //-  was  retained 
permanently  in  the  negative  and  dropped  permanently  in  the 
conjunction. 

'  Per  Persson,  I.F.,  2,  206. 

^  Cf.  Conway,  A.J. P.,  10,  455.  If  Conway's  reading  of  the  Duenos  inscrip- 
tion is  the  correct  one,  noine  does  not  occur. 

sSolmsen,  Stud,  zur  Lat.  Lautge.,  87,  and  cf.  Conway,  A.J. P.,  10,  455; 
Planta,  I,  152. 

-•Habich  (De  neg.  usu  Plant.,  13),  following  Ritschl,  takes  hand  as  the 
more  original  form.     Cf.  Stolz,  Lat.  Gr.,  317. 

s  For  connections  see  p.  16. 

^The  use  of  antem  as  an  intensive,  not,  however,  of  a  negative,  occurs  occa- 
sionally in  Plautus ;  cf.  Pseud.,  305,  Amph.,  901. 

7  Wharton,  Ety.  Lat.,  supposes  the  h-  to  be  unorganic  and  compares  antem. 
I  do  not  know  how  he  would  connect  the  meanings  of  the  two  words.  >^  \  ^  'l.^t 


2  8         NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

The  origin  of  the  negative  meaning  of  hand  is  indicated  by 
the  collocation  neque  .  .  .  hand,  of  which  most  of  the  examples 
are  in  Plautus.     The  examples  are  : ' 

Neque  ego  haud  committam.     Bacch.,  1037. 

Neque  id  hand  imt)ierito  tiio.      Men.,  371. 

Neque  illud  hand  obiciet  niihi.      Epid.,  664. 

Neque  mihi  Jiaud  imperito  eveniet.      Persa,  535. 

Neque  id  haud  subditiva  arbitror  gloria  esse.     Bacch.,  26. 

Neque  haut  Ion ge post.     Gellius,  17,  21,  34. 

Ne  temere  facias :  neque  tu  haud  dices  tihi  //on praedictum.  Cave. 
Ter.  Andr.,  205.'' 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  in  the  examples  from  Plautus  and  Ter- 
ence neque  and  haud  are  separated  by  only  one  word,  in  that 
from  Gellius  not  at  all.  The  examples  of  neque  .  .  .  numquatn 
differ  in  this  respect,  and,  besides,  such  double  negatives  as  neque 
.  .  .  nunquam  (negative  and  negative  indefinite)  are  to  be  expected 
almost  everywhere  in  literature  and  do  not  serve  to  explain  neque 
.  .  .  haud.^  The  nearness  of  the  two  negatives  to  each  other 
would  seem  to  preclude  the  supposition  that  the  negatives  were 
separated  in  their  application,  which  is  a  necessary  condition  for 
the  use  of  two  negatives  in  the  sense  of  one.  If  it  were  the  case 
that  the  force  of  the  neque  was  expended  on  the  following  word, 
haud  would  be  left  as  the  special  negative  of  the  verb  in  four  of 
the  seven  cases,  which  is  not  the  common  use  of  this  negative. 
It  seems  necessary,  then,  to  separate  neque  .  .  .  haud  from  such 
cases  as  Plautus,  Cure,  579,''  and  Cato,  R.R.,  66.^ 

Neque  .  .  .  haud,  except  for  the  conjunction  -que,  is  just  like 
French  ne  .  .  .  pas  —  the  two  are  practically  one  word  negativing 
the  sentence.^  We  may  conjecture  that  the  few  examples  we  have 
of  the  collocation  are  the  survivals  of  a  common  form  of  expres- 
sion. The  dying  out  was  the  natural  result  of  //i^?//*^/ becoming  an 
independent  negative. 

'  Of.  Ziemer,  Jung.  Streif.,  141  ;  Habich,  7. 

'  Probably  the  true  reading,  although  the  MSS.  have  hoc  in  place  of  hand. 

■iCf.  Gebauer,  Archiv  f.  Slav.  Phil.,  8,  177. 

■•  Ut  ego  tua  magnifica  verba,  neque  istas  fiias  iiiagiias  ///iiias,  fion  plitris 
facia  quavi  ancillani  meani. 

5  .See  p.  6. 

''The  explanation  given  by  Strong,  Logeman,  and  Wheeler  (Hist,  of  Lang., 
155)  of  double  negatives  caused  by  contamination  seems  inapplicable  here  ;  nor 
is  it  possible  that  neque  .  .  .  hatui  is  a  translation  of  a  Gr.  double  negative. 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUKOPEAN  LANGUAGES        29 

It  may  well  be  that  hand  was  allowed  to  stand  by  itself  first 
in  adjectival  and  adverbial  expressions  not  closely  connected  with 
a  verb  and  forming,  as  it  were,  an  accentual  unit.  It  is  in  such 
cases  that  French  ne  pas  has  become /ai'  and  ne  point  point.  This 
would  explain  the  common  use  of  Iiaitd  with  adjectives  and 
adverbs. 

Lat.  ///-  (as  negative  prefix),  I.E.  //. 


OSCAN. 

Osc.  ne,  I.E.  ne. 
Osc.  «/',  I.E.  ne. 
Osc.  nei,  I.E.  nei. 

All  these  Oscan  negatives  form  compounds  with  -/  (Lat.  -que) 
the  conjunction  retaining  its  proper  force. 
Osc.  an-  (negative  prefix),  I.E.  //. 


u  M  B  R 1 A  N . 

Umbr.  ne-  (in  nc-p),  I.E.  ne. 

Umbr.  nei-  (in  neip),  I.E.  nei. 

Umbr.  )io-  (in  no-sve),  I.E.  no. 

Umbr.  nosve  has  usually  been  regarded  as  equal  to  Lat.  fiisi, 
though  it  was  phonetically  impossible  to  connect  no-  with  Lat. 
ni-,  n'l,  ne,  or  ne,  and  non  seemed  specifically  Lat.  So  Brugmann' 
has  proposed  to  see  in  the  word  not  a  negative,  but  a  representa- 
tive of  I.E.  nit,  "now."  But  the  supposition  seems  impossible 
for  phonetic  reasons.^  I.E.  u  became  0  in  Umbr.  only  under 
certain  conditions,  which  will  not  include  nosve.  The  usual  rep- 
resentative was  //,  as  shown  hy  fust,  tuva,  etc.;  while  u  became  0 
only  before  ni.  The  result  before  other  labials  was  a  "  Mittel- 
laut,"  which  was  sometimes  written  //,  sometimes  0  (sopa:supa). 

As   for  the  meaning  required  for  the  word  by  the  passage^  in 

'  Osk.  und  Umbr.,  225  ;  cf.  Bucheler,  Umbrica,  96,  and  Breal,  Eugubines, 
XXII. 

2  Von  Planta,  §§  51-2. 

3  Ig.  Tab.  VI,  B,  54.  The  passage  with  Breal's  translation  is  as  follows  : 
.  .  .  eetu  ehesH  popln.  nosve  ier  die  esu  pophi,  sopir  habe  esme  pople,  portatu  ulo 
pne  mersest,fetH  urii  pirse  mers  est;  "ito  ex  hoc  populo.  Si  non  iverit  ex  hoc 
populo,  siquis  incola  est,  huic  populo  [vectigal]  portatu  illuc  ubi  lex  est,  sacri- 
ficato  id  quod  lex  est." 


30        NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

which  it  occurs,  it  seems  to  me  the  negative  is  the  more  natural. 
It  would  seem  that  the  object  was  to  get  rid  of  the  "peregrini," 
and  what  they  did  after  leaving  the  territory  would  be  a  matter  of 
indifference  to  the  Iguvini.  The  most  natural  thing  after  the 
decree  of  expulsion  would  be  a  threat  against  those  who  failed  to 
obey  that  decree.  Habe'^  is  used  absolutely,  /.  e.,  with  some  word 
for  "property"  understood  in  thought,  which  word  would  then 
be  supplied  as  the  object  of  portatu.  The  sense  would  be  then, 
"  Let  these  people  depart,  but  if  they  do  not  depart,  whoever'  has 
property  shall  contribute  it  for  this  people  to  be  used  in  the  com- 
ing sacrifice."  If  Brugmann's  interpretation  is  the  correct  one, 
we  should  expect  in  place  of  nosve,  "if  now, '' pone,  "when,"  as  he 
himself  admits.  Brugmann's  interpretation  apparently  agrees 
better  with  the  briefer  direction  in  Table  I;^  but  it  may  easily 
have  been  that  "svepis  h  abe,  etc.,"  was  understood  as  the  pen- 
alty attached  to  the  non-compliance  with  the  sentence  of  banish- 
ment not  here  expressed. 

Umbr.  an-  (as  negative  prefix),  I.E.  //. 


OLD    IRISH. 

I.E.  7fie  does  not  appear  in  Celtic.     O.Ir.  mi-  (negative  pre- 
fix) probably  corresponds  to  Germanic  miss-.'' 
O.Ir.  /il,  I.E.  ne. 

The  negative  is  used  with  con  and  in  the  compound  ma-nt, 
"if  not." 

O.Ir.  nd,  I.E.  /id. 

The  word  further  appears  in  the  compounds  ?/dd,  ndch,  arnd, 
arnach,  arnad,  conna,  connaro. 

Also  in  Scotch  Gaelic  and  Welsh  ni  and  nd  appear  as  the 
representatives  of  I.E.  ne  and  no  respectively. 

O.Ir.  an-^  am-,  e-  (negative  prefix),  I.E.  //. 

'  Cf.  Harper's  Lex.,  sitl)  v.  habeo,  II,  A. 

^Sopir=^  "quisquis;"  Brugmann,  Osk.  unci  Umbr.,  214,  andv.  Plauta,  152. 

3  Tab.  \,  b,  17,  18,  eturstamu  tuta  .  .  .  :  "svepis  habe,  purtatulu, 
pue  mers  est,  feitu  usu,  pere  mers  est,"  which  Biicheler  translates, 
"exterminato  urbem  .  .  .  sicjuis  habet,  portato  illo  (juo  jus  est,  facito  illo  quod 
jus  est." 

■*  Cf.  Kluge,  sub  V.  miss-,  and  Feist,  sub  v.  miss-. 

5  In  regard  to  an{a)-  cf.  Zimmer,  K.Z.,  24,  532. 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES        3 1 
GOTHIC. 

Goth,  ni,  I.E.  tie. 

Goth,  ni  appears  further  in  the  compounds  niba  nibai,  nih,  niu. 
The  -/;'  of  nih  is  the  I.E.  qe,  Skr.  ca,  Gr.  re,  Lat.  -que,  Osc.-Umbr. 
-/.  Goth,  niu-  (interrogative)  contains  the  enclitic  particle  u 
(Vedic  u,  etc.)  and  so  would  correspond  in  form  almost  exactly 
with  Lat.  neu  {<ine-u),  though  the  composition  in  the  two  lan- 
guages was  doubtless  independent. 

Goth,  ne,  I.E.  ne. 

Goth,  nei,  I.E.  nei. 


OLD    HIGH    GERMAN. 

O.H.G.  ni,  I.E.  ne. 

O.H.G.  niwiht,  niowihi,  nein,  nio,  nioman,  etc.,  show  ni  com- 
pounded with  various  pronominal  words.  O.H.G.  noh,  "neither," 
can  hardly  be  explained  as  phonetically  from  I.E.  ne  +  qe — the 
form  should  correspond  with  Goth.  nih.  Paul's ^  and  Braune's* 
supposition  of  a  change  of  .?  lo  ^  in  enclitics  and  proclitics  seems 
uncertain  and  perhaps  would  not  apply  here  if  established.  One 
might  see  here  I.E.  no.  But  more  probably  the  similarity  of  form 
of  noh  (Goth,  naiih,  I.E.  nu-qe)  and  the  use  of  that  particle  as  an 
intensive  to  a  negative  caused  it  to  assume  the  force  of  nih,  driv- 
ing that  particle  out  of  use  as  an  independent  adverb  and  thence 
influencing  the  vowel  in  the  compound  nih{h)ein  {noh{h)ein  :  nih- 
{h)ein.^) 

^  Cf.  Sonne,  K.Z.,  12,  279;  Dahlmann,  J.P.,  2,  257  ;  Brugmann,  II,  411  ; 
Scherer,  Z.G.D.S.,  476.     Scherer  would  connect  Goth,  -h  with  Lat.  -c,  Gr.  -/c  in 

2  Cf.  Scherer,  Sonne,  and  Dahlmann  as  above,  and  J.  Schmidt,  Vocalismus, 
I,  152. 

3P.B.B.,  6,  248. 

'•  Ahd.  Gr.,  §  29. 

5  The  usual  derivation  oi  nihhein  ixora.  nih  tf/«  seems  hardly  satisfactory. 
Nihhein  and  dehhein  must  be  considered  together.  If  the  latter  is  from  a 
deh  +  ein  {cf.  Kluge,  sub  v.  kein),  there  is  no  explanation  for  *deh-.  The 
occurrence  of  -kh-  (beside  -h-)  in  both  words  might  not  be  difficult  of  explana- 
tion {cf.  Braune,  A.H.G.  Gr.,  §154,  A,  6),  but  nih  with  meaning  "and  not" 
could  hardly  enter  the  compound,  and  we  have  no  evidence  of  the  uncom- 
pounded  adverb  meaning  simply  "  not."  It  is  difficult  to  understand  under 
what  circumstances  dechein  became  kein  in  M.H.G.  Would  it  not  be  better  to 
suppose  that  the  first  member  of  the  compound  dehein  is  the  article  as  in  de- 


32         NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUKOPEAN  LANGUAGES 
NORTH    (GERMANIC. 

In  North  Clernianic  all  I.E.  negative  adverbs  disappeared. 
Besides  the  negative  verbal  suffix  -at,  which  Noreen'  connects 
with  Goth,  aiiiata,  a  negative  appears  in  the  various  dialects,  e.  g., 
O.Ic.  ekke,  compounded  of  eit,  neuter  of  eiii,  and  a  particle  -gc, 
-gi.  This  particle ""  is  the  same  one  that  a{)pears  in  man{n)-ge, 
"Niemand,"  hverge,  "nirgends,"  and  so  is  plainly  responsible  for 
the  negative  force  of  ck-ke,  etc. 


Germanic  t///-'  (negative  prefix),  I.E.  >/. 

O.H.G.  a-,  O.E.  ce-  (negative  prefix),  I.E.  [f-{'?). 

In  O.H.G.  some  ten  or  fifteen''  words  appear  with  this  prefix, 
among  which  are  d-tcil,  "non-participation,"  and  d-mdlit,  whence 
the  N.H.G.  Ohiimacht  {^xdiX^oXAQ.  Oh-inacht),  with  -;/  from  the  com- 
moner prefix  iin-}  The  number  of  examples  could  be  added  to 
from  M.H.G.  In  O.E.  some  ten  or  twelve  words  have  ce  as  nega- 
tive prefix,  e.  g.,  ce-meii,  "unmanned,"  ce-iiot,  "useless."  If  now 
these  prefixes  are  to  be  connected,  as  it  seems  they  should  be, 
they  point  to  an  urgermanic  vowel  sound  differing  but  little,  if 
any,  in  degree  of  openness  from  urgermanic  e.  But  cj"  as  a  neg- 
ative prefix  would  stand  entirely  by  itself,  unless  it  is  to  be  con- 
nected with  I.E.  //. 

weder?  (This  can  hardly  be  for  *deh-wedej;  as  Braune  would  have  it  —  §295, 
A,  2  ;  cf.  Ill  weder.)  If  the  compound  were  formed  early, -////- would  be  regu- 
larly for  Germanic  -/•-,  and  -h-  would  be  a  simplification  seen  in  other  cases. 
We  would  have,  then,  for  the  last  member  a  Germanic  pronoun  kein,  and  in  the 
case  of  nihhein  the  first  member  would  be  ni-,  as  in  ni  weder.  This  kein,  or  at 
least  its  initial,  is  to  be  connected  in  some  way  with  the  -k  of  Goth,  mi-k,  thu-k, 
si-k,  which  may  be  identified  with  the  Gr.  7e.  Compare  also  Skr.  ha,  gha,  and 
-g  of  Lat.  >ieg.  (Cf.  Curtius,  Grundziige,  526  ;  and  Havet,  Mem.  Soc.  Ling.,  6, 
118.) 

'  Altic.  und  Aitnorw.  Gr.,  §  57,  4 /^ 

2  Noreen,  71,  and  (/.  above,  p.  7. 

3 On  O.H.G.  una-  in  una-holda,  see  p.  8. 

"  Cf.  Weinhold,  M.II.G.  Gr.,  §  291,  who  connects  O.H.G.  a-,  with  Skr.  a-. 
Grimm,  695,  connects  O.H.G.  a-  with  the  preposition,  Goth,  us,  etc. 

5  Andresen,  Deutsche  Volksetymologie,  275. 

*  (\f  represents  the  sound  just  mentioned  and  which,  as  I  shall  try  to  show, 
was  a  more  or  less  nasalized  vowel  sound  slightly  more  closed  than  urgermanic  e. 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES        33 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  in  all  the  O.H.G.  and  O.E.  words  the 
prefix  appears  before  a  consonant.  It  might  well  be  that  an  ante- 
vocalic  form  of  the  prefix  was  displaced  by  the  common  uu-.  So 
we  are  at  liberty  to  suppose  for  the  urgermanic  sound  some  sort 
of  nasal  affection  (nasalization,  glide  sound,  or  both),  which  should 
disappear  in  O.H.G.  before  consonants,  but  which  might  be  found 
to  appear  before  vowels. 

The  O.H.G.,  Goth.,  and  Gr.  words  for  "without"  —  dnu,  inu, 
and  avei>  —  are  of  value  in  the  discussion.  Kluge'  and  others  have 
connected  these  words,  but  I  do  not  think  the  phonetics  have 
been  made  clear.  If  we  suppose,  now,  that  the  urgermanic  sound 
mentioned  above  was  slightly  closer  than  urgermanic  e,  there  is  no 
diflticulty  in  supposing  as  representatives  of  it  Goth,  in-,  O.H.G. 
an-,  before  vowels,  and  O.H.G.  a-,  O.E.  ^-,  before  consonants. 
This  will  permit  us  to  connect  directly  Goth,  inu  and  O.H.G. 
dnu  d)io  ana,  O.S.  ano,  O.Ic.  on  an.  They  are  representatives  of 
I.E.  nn-u. 

Gr.  aveu  has  been  connected  with  Skr.  sanutar.''  To  say 
nothing  of  the  initial  smooth  breathing,  the  identity  in  meaning 
and  the  apparent  resemblance  in  form  of  Gr.  avev  and  O.H.G. 
dnu,  Goth,  inu,^  should  lead  us  to  suppose  that  avev  was  connected, 
not  with  sanutar,''  but  with  the  Germanic  words.  This  can  be 
done  by  supposing  beside  I.E.  nn-u  a  form  nn-eu.  The  last  ele- 
ment in  these  forms  is  the  particle  u,  Vedic  //,  etc.,  and  the  first, 
as  I  think,  the  I.E.  //  //,  which  appears  in  the  separate  languages 
as  a  negative  prefix. ^ 

'Kluge,  s.  V.  ohne;  Feist,  sub  v.  imt;  Prellwitz,  sub  v.  iLvev;  Bezzenberger, 
Adverb.,  84 ;  Noreen,  Urgermanische  Lautlehre,  85.  Noreen  connects  the 
words  with  the  various  forms  of  the  negative  ne,  but  in  a  way  hardly  satisfac- 
tory, it  seems  to  me. 

^Bartholomae,  B.B.,  15,  16,  and  cf.  Meringer,  B.B.,  16,  227,  and  Johansson, 
B.B.,  15,310. 

3O.B.  vHiin  is  doubtless  for  vtnu, — cf.  vine  Skr.  vind ;  cf.  Jagic  Archiv.  f. 
Slav.  Phil.  I,  17,  Per  Persson,  I.F".,  2,  213  and  references.  Possibly  also  a  Skr. 
auo  is  to  be  added  ;  see  B.  and  R.,  sub  v.  For  the  Ossetan  iind  see  Hiibsch- 
mann,  Oss.  Sprache,  21. 

*  With  Skr.  sauu/ar  sanitur  are  connected  Gr.  firep  and  oaap,  the  aspiration 
being  lost  through  the  influence  of  fivei/  and  avrap  (Brugmann,  II,  75).  Gr. 
&VIS  from  dvev  after  X'^P'S  (Brugmann,  Gr.  Gr.,  218). 

5  This  derivation  of  Goth,  inu,  O.H.G.  dnu,  Gr.  dvev,  as  well  as  that  of  the 
O.H.G.  d-,  O.E.  te-,  is  in  conflict  with  the  theory  advanced  by  Plerlinger  (K.Z., 


34        NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

There  may  be  difficulty  in  supposing  that  a  compound  adverb- 
preposition  nti-eu  was  formed  from  //,  which  regularly  appears  as 
a  negative  prefix,  and  a  particle  u.  However,  remembering  that 
originally  //  was  an  independent  word  negativing  a  noun  and, 
that  so,  it  could  have  a  particle  as  //  attached  to  it,  and  remem- 
bering that  /i-ehjos  came  to  mean  "without  a  horse,"  we  may  be 
allowed  to  conjecture  that  n  eu  ekuos  came  to  have  the  same 
meaning,  although  the  words  did  not  form  so  close  a  compound 
that  nn-eu  would  be  unable  to  be  separated  as  an  adverb-preposi- 
tion meaning  "without."'  Something  very  near  the  reverse  of 
this  process  is  to  be  seen,  for  example,  in  Skr.  iiirmaksikam, 
"with  freedom  from  flies." 


L  ITHUANI  AN. 

Lith.  ne,  I.E.  iie. 

The  use  of  the  particle  was  extended  and  drove  out  entirely 
the  representatives  of  I.E.  n-  and  fi-  as  negative  prefixes.  It  did 
not  form  negative  indefinite  pronouns  and  adverbs.  It  was 
strengthened  by  particles  -gi  and  -gu,  and  formed  a  conjunc- 
tional compound  neba  {cf.  the  Av.  particle  bd). 

27,  436,  and  cf.  Kluge,  sub  v..  Art.,  and  Wood,  Red.  Verbs  in  Germ.,  34)  that 
the  Germanic  representation  of  I.E.  n  was  an.  But  the  only  apparent  support 
for  this  theory  is  furnished  by  Germanic  gaggan  and  blandan,  which  have  con- 
geners with  an  -e-  form  of  root,  and  O.E.  and  (Kluge,  P.B.B.,  10,  444).  The 
analogy  of  the  long  sonant  liquids  will  give  no  support  here,  since  the  repre- 
sentations of  sonant  liquids  and  sonant  nasals  in  the  separate  developments 
differ  as  often  as  they  agree.  Cf.  further  Hubschmann,  Vocalismus,  134  f.; 
Brugmann,  I,  306:  Osthoff,  Perfect.,  178,  417;  and  de  Saussure,  System  Prim., 
274.  De  Saussure  supposes  that  the  Goth,  representation  of  //  was  un,  and  so 
also  Streitberg,  I.F.,  6,  141.  I  am  not  unaware  of  the  narrow  basis  upon  which 
my  own  theory  rests,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  I  believe  nothing  very  definite  can 
be  urged  against  it.  To  be  sure,  n  is  not  assumed  to  have  existed  before  vowels, 
as  I  have  supposed  in  the  case  of  the  I.E.  nn-tt  :  Goth,  hiu,  O.H.G.  anu.  But 
even  if  the  rule  were  definitely  established,  it  could  not  be  applied  with  certainty 
to  a  case  of  this  kind.  The  -u  may  have  become  attached  to  the  n  in  a  late 
period  of  the  I.E.,  when  the  accentual  laws  which  had  caused  the  differentiation 
of  ;/  and  n  had  ceased  to  work.  It  is  possible  that  I.E.  //-  (negative  prefix) 
occurs  in  Goth,  in-winds,  "  unjust,"  and  inwidan,  "  to  refuse  to  recognize,"  and 
I.E.  m  in  sinteins,  sinteino,  "  irdfTOTe."  (For  the  suffix,  compare  Lat.  mati'itlnus, 
dit'ttinus,  perendinus;  but  see  Brugmann,  Die  Ausdriicke  fiir  den  Begriff  der 
Totalitat,  23.) 

'  Delbriick,  Ver.  Syntax,  299,  gives  Gr.  6.vev,  Goth,  inuk,  as  an  example  of 
prepositions  which  were  proethnic  and  which  were  not  praverbia. 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES        35 

Lith.  nei  (ffe-),  I.E.  fiei. 

In  contrast  with  f/c  uci  was  not  used  as  a  true  negative  prefix 
and  did  form  indefinite  pronouns  and  adverbs,  e.  g.,  nei  venas, 
"no  one"  (beside  nev'ens,  "not  one,"  "many"). 

Lith.  7iai-,  I.E.  noi. 

The  word  only  occurs  in  naikaJi  and  the  more  common  tiai- 
kinii,  "tilgen."  Beside  naikinii  we  have  nekinti,  "verachten,"  the 
latter  evidently  being  a  denominative  of  nekas.  We  must  suppose 
that  there  once  existed  in  Lith.  the  indefinite  pronouns  nai-kas 
and  nei-kas,  from  each  of  which  a  denominative  was  formed.' 


OLD    BULGARIAN. 

O.B.  ne,  I.E.  ne. 

O.B.  ni,  I.E.  71  ei  or  710 i. 

As  in  the  case  of  the  corresponding  words  in  Lith.,  O.B.  ne  is 
used  as  a  negative  prefix  and  ;//  to  form  negative  indefinites. 


SYNTAX.^ 


None  of  the  negatives  of  separate  origin  was  prohibitive,^ /.  ^., 
used  with  volitive  forms.  Negative  prefixes  sometimes  arose, 
practically  equivalent  to  the  representatives  of  I.E.  //  or  ;7,  e.  g., 
Lith.  be-,  O.B.  bez-. 

Of  the  representatives  of  the  I.E.  forms,  >ie  ue  no  no  nei  noi, 
me,  the  syntactical  uses  as  they  appear  in  the  various  languages 
may  be  classified  as  i)  prohibitive,  2)  convictional,  3)  conjunc- 
tional, 4)  negative  of  dependent  sentences,  5)  conditional,  6) 
interrogative. 

■  The  relation  of  iiyksth  to  nekinu  and  naikinu  I  do  not  attempt  to  discuss. 
It  may  be  an  afformate  to  these  words,  01  may  be  entirely  distinct  and  to  be 
connected  with  ninkii  tiikau,  Lett,  niktts,  O.B.  niknq.ti.  Cf.  J.  Schmidt,  Plural- 
bildung,  396,  n.,  and  Leskien,  Der  Ablaut  der  Wurzelsilben  im  Lith.,  279. 

2  It  is  proposed  here  to  discuss  briefly  the  syntactical  uses  of  the  negatives 
of  the  various  languages,  mainly  with  the  view  of  discovering  the  original  value 
of  the  I.E.  negatives  and  the  relations  existing  between  that  original  value  and 
the  values  attached  to  the  negatives  of  the  separate  languages. 

3  Sacrificing  exactness  to  convenience  I  use  the  term  ''''prohibitive  "  as  indi- 
cated, ''''volitive  forms''^  for  forms  expressing  will  or  wish,  "convictional  nega- 
tive "  as  opposed  to  "  prohibitive,"  i.  e.,  the  negative  of  expressions  of  convic- 
tion, expectation,  possibility,  etc.     On  Goth,  ibai  and  O.^.jeda,  see  p.  14,  n. 


36         NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

The  last  two'  can  only  be  regarded  as  specializations  in  the 
use  of  the  convictional  or  prohibitive  negatives.  A  special  nega- 
tive for  dependent  sentences  is  found,  I  believe,  only  in  Celtic, 
and  there  the  distinction  was  not  always  kept  up.  The  use  of 
Celtic  >id  in  dependent  sentences  is  probably  connected  with  its 
use  with  volitive  forms. 

The  conjunctional  use  of  a  negative  is  only  to  be  seen  —  with 
certainty^  at  least  —  in  the  case  of  Skr.  ned,  Gr.  \xy],  Lat.  nc,  and 
O.H.G.  ni.  In  all  these  cases,  except  that  of  Skr.  ned,  it  is  easy 
to  see  that  the  conjunctional  force  arose  through  the  development 
of  the  clause  introduced  by  it  from  an  independent  through  a 
paratactic  to  hypotactic  clause  of  purpose,  etc.  But  the  case  of 
Skr.  ned  is  somewhat  different.  In  independent  sentences  there 
was  no  distinction  between  na  and  ned,"^  and  neither  was  to  any 
great  extent  the  negative  of  the  subjunctive  with  its  volitive  force. 
The  ordinary  paratactic  expression  of  purpose  was  with  nid  and 
the  injunctive.''  But  we  may  suppose  that  beside  the  paratactic 
md  with  injunctive  or  even,  perhaps,  earlier  than  that  construction 
for  purpose,  there  was  a  paratactic  expression  of  purpose  with 
)ied  (and  na)  with  the  subjunctive,  not  descended  directly  from 
an  expression  of  negative  will,  but  formed  by  adding  a  negative 
to  the  positive  expression  legitimately  using  the  subjunctive.^ 
It  might  well  be  that  ned  should  be  introduced  into  and 
become  the  generally  used  negative  in  these  sentences  without 
being  freely  used  in  expressions  of  a  more  evident  volitive 
character. 

The  facts  indicate  that  the  conjunctional  use  of  the  negative 

'  The  last  is  altogether  uncertain.  The  only  case  is  Goth.  >iei,  and  that 
occurs  with  interrogative  force  without  an  interrogative  word  but  once.  Lat. 
nei  ni  and  Osc.  7ie  are  the  only  examples  of  a  conditionally  used  negative.  For 
nl,  see  O.  Brugmann,  Nl.  Osc.  ne  only  once  and  that  with  pun, — tie  pit  u,  "nisi 
cum." 

=  I  venture  the  opinion  that  the  sentences  introduced  hv  lua  in  the  Av. 
should  not  be  considered  as  dependent.  The  fact  that  ina  was  not  so  used  in 
Skr.,  O.P.,  or  in  the  modern  Persian  and  the  possibility  oi  considering  the 
examples  paratactic  should  lead  one  to  that  view. 

sDelbriick,  Syn.  Forsch.,  I,  112,  121  ;   Whitney,  J.A.O.S.,  5,  385,  399, 

*■  Delbriick,  Syn.  Forsch.,  V,  546. 

5  Beside  the  subjunctive  and  equivalent  to  it  in  these  clauses  is,  of  course, 
the  injunctive,  and  the  optative  occurs  once  (A.H.,  8,_'23,  11). 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES         37 

did  not  belong  to  the  parent  speech.'  The  use  does  not  appear 
in  near  all  these  languages  ;  the  negatives  so  used  are  not  the 
same  in  any  two  of  them,  the  negative  so  used  in  Skr.  is  a  special 
Aryan  strengthened  form  of  I.E.  ne ;  only  the  purpose  clause 
appears  in  Skr.,  while  in  the  other  languages  also  substantive 
clauses  are  so  introduced  ;  the  conjunctional  use  of  O.H.G.'  ni  is 
quite  certainly  a  special  development,  since  the  use  does  not 
appear  in  Gothic. 

We  have  left,  then,  two  values  possible  for  the  I.E.  negatives 
—  prohibitive  and  convictional. 

The  value  of  I.E.  me  was  either  that  of  a  prohibitive  negative 
or  one  from  which  such  a  value  could  be  derived.  In  all  lan- 
guages in  which  it  occurs  it  has  a  more  or  less  restricted  prohib- 
itive value. 

On  the  other  hand,  for  the  representatives  of  I.E.  ne  and  its 
ablaut  forms,  with  the  exception  of  //  //,  the  separate  languages 
show  variations.  The  form  ne  never  became  a  special  prohibitive. 
In  Germanic  and  Balto-Slavic,  where  no  distinction  was  made, 
I.E.  7ie^  was  used  as  convictional  and  prohibitive  ;  and  in  Skr., 
while  na  was  sometimes  used  with  volitive  forms,  md  was  pecu- 
liarly the  prohibitive  negative.  The  form  ne  became  specially 
prohibitive  only  in  Latin,  but  the  convictional  value  is  retained 
in  the  collocation  ne  .  .  .  quidem.  The  form  nei  was  also  used 
in  Latin  as  a  prohibitive,  but  it  never  became  restricted  to  this 
use.  The  form  no  became  prohibitive  only  in  Celtic,  and  there 
I.E.  ne  was  not  altogether  excluded  from  use  with  imperative  and 
subjunctive.  The  use  of  O.Ir.  )id  in  dependent  sentences  is  pos- 
sibly connected  with   its  use  as  a  prohibitive.     It  is  noteworthy 

'This  would  furnish  some  evidence  in  support  of  the  statement  that  the 
parent  speech  did  not  possess  dependent  sentences.  Cf.  Hermann,  K.Z.,  23, 
481  f.;  Zimmer,  Festgruss  an  Roth,  173.  If  negative  purpose  clauses  are  not 
proethnic,  probably  positive  purpose  clauses  are  not.  Probably  also  all  sen- 
tences introduced  by  a  setitence  relative  (?'.  e.,  relative  adverb)  are  to  be  classed 
as  not  proethnic.  Further  than  this,  however,  the  evidence  furnished  by  the 
absence  of  conjunctionally  used  negatives  would  not  reach. 

^O.H.G.  ni,  "dass  nicht,"  "quin,"  only  after  negative  sentences. 

3  In  Latin  probabivthe  use  of  ne  as  a  prohibitive  survives  in  a  few  cases  of 
neqtte  [nee)  with  volitive  subjunctive,  e.  g.,  Plautus,  Asin.,  775  ff.  {<r/-  Elmer,  A. 
I.P.,  15,  299  ff.,  especially  319;  Loch,  Imperativus  bei  Plautus;  and  A.J. P.,  16, 
No.  4).  In  Oscan  nep  (Lat.  nee)  was  used  with  volitive  forms,  and  in  Umbrian 
nep  is  used  with  an  imperative  {neip  .  .  .  nep,  VI,  A,  6). 


38         NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

that,  while  in  Latin  ne  was  prohibitive,  nD-ii  {e)  convictional,  in 
O.Ir.,  so  far  as  the  distinction  was  made,  na  (Lat.  no-)  was  pro- 
hibitive and  ;//  (Lat.  ne)  convictional.  The  form  iioi  nowhere 
shows  signs  of  being  a  prohibitive. 

We  shall  be  safe  in  saying  that  originally  none  of  these  forms 
of  ne  had  a  special  prohibitive  force,  and  that  the  development  or 
specialization  took  place  in  each  instance  to  meet  a  want  for  some 
reason  not  felt  in  the  LE.  period. 

What,  now,  was  the  relation  of  me  to  ne  and  its  ablaut  forms? 
The  persistent  use  of  me  as  a  more  or  less  restricted  prohibitive 
wherever  it  occurs  precludes  the  supposition  that  me  and  ne  were 
used  indiscriminately.  And  it  is  about  equally  certain  that  me 
and  ne  were  not  contrasted  as  the  negatives  of  volitive  and  non- 
volitive  forms  respectivelv.  If  such  a  distinction  had  been  estab- 
lished in  LE.  times,  we  should  expect  to  find  it  more  generally 
kept  up,  and  especially  in  all  those  languages  in  which  the  dis- 
tinction of  prohibitive  and  convictional  negatives  appear  we 
should  expect  to  find  tne  retained.  In  Italic  and  Celtic,  however, 
we  have  the  distinction  of  prohibitive  and  convictional  negative, 
but  me  has  disappeared.  Whether,  now,  we  suppose  that  in  Latin 
me  died  out  before  ne  became  prohibitive,  or  that  ne  became 
prohibitive  and  displaced  me,  we  should  be  obliged  to  suppose 
that  the  distinction  died  out  and  arose  anew,  and  this  is  not 
probable.  But  the  strongest  argument  against  supposing  that  7ne 
bore  the  same  relation  to  ne  in  I.E.  that  /u.7;  did  to  ov  in  Gr.  is 
furnished  by  the  state  of  affairs  we  find  in  Skr.,  supplemented  by 
that  in  Av.,  O.P.,  and  Gr.  The  most  important  fact  is  that  in 
Vedic  Skr.  md''  is  used  only  with  the  injunctive.  So  far  as  we 
can  judge,  the  older  Avestan^  was  the  same  as  the  older  Skr.;  the 
Gathas  have  md  only  with  the  injunctive.  In  O.P.  md  generally 
has  the  injunctive,  sometimes  the  optative.  In  Gr.  the  use  of  \i.t] 
with  the  aorist  subjunctive,  contrasted  with  the  use  of  the  same 
particle  with  present  imperative,  would  seem  to  be  a  continuation' 
of  the  use  of  the  negative  with  the  aorist  injunctive,  which  Avery's* 

■Grassmann,  sub  v.  ma;  Delbiiick,  Syn.  Forsch.,  V,  358.  The  only  excep- 
tion of  importance,  if  not  absolutely,  is  the  use  of  iiia  with  the  optative  hlntjenia, 
which  itself  does  not  occur  without  ma. 

'Spiegel,  Alter.  Gr.,  520. 

3C/.C.\N.  E.  Miller,  A.J.I'.,  418  f.,  and  DelbrUck,  Syn.  Forsch.,  V,  358. 

M-A.OS..  13,  326  f. 


NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  lANGUAGES         39 

Statistics  show  to  have  been  the  most  common  tense,  especially  in 
the  earliest  Sanskrit.  Possibly,  too,  the  more  energetic  character 
of  the  perfect  in  prohibitions  in  Latin  and  the  preference  for  the 
perfect  after  the  negative  in  Oscan  is  to  be  brought  into  this 
connection.' 

Now  it  can  hardly  be  that  ma  (I.E.  mc')  was  originally  used 
freely  with  volitive  forms  and  later  was  restricted  to  use  with  the 
injunctive,  for,  even  in  Skr.,  the  injunctive  was  the  least  distinct- 
ively volitive  of  all  the  volitive  forms  and  probably  at  a  period 
not  much  antedating  the  Rig  Veda  was  not  modal  at  all."  The 
conclusion  is,  then,  that  me  in  I.E.  was,  in  a  way,  prohibitive,  but 
used  only  with  the  injunctive  or,  in  other  words,  that  the  pro- 
ethnic  method  of  expressing  prohibition  and  negative  wish  was 
by  means  of  mi-  and  the  injunctive. ^  This  conclusion  is  sup- 
ported by  the  fact  that  in  Vedic  Skr.  the  imperative  has  no  nega- 
tive and  by  the  restricted  use  of  the  negative  with  the  imperative 
in  Latin.  The  true  original  force  of  mc  appears  when  we  con- 
sider the  probable  original  value  of  the  injunctive.  If  the  injunc- 
tive was  non-modal,''  /.  e.,  did  not  express  will  or  ivish,  then  it  is 
plain  that  in  a  collocation  of  me  and  injunctive  expressing  nega- 
tive will  or  wish  the  modal  idea  must  have  been  expressed  by 
the  me,  and  only  the  verbal  idea  was  conveyed  by  the  injunctive. 
So  do)i''t  in  English  is  strictly  speaking  not  the  negative  of  a 
following  verb,  and  there  may  be  no  conscious  connection  with 
the  nesfative  not,  but  it  is  an  expression  of  prohibition  or  nega- 
tive will  to  which  various  verbal  ideas  may  be  added  by  means 
of  the  colorless  infinitive.  Indeed,  instead  of  believing  that  me 
was  originally  a  negative  of  a  modal  form,  we  may  rather  con- 
jecture that  the  modal  force  of  the  injunctive  proceeded  from 
this  very  use  with  me  in  prohibition,  or,  at  least,  that  the  develop- 
ment of  modal  force  was  thus  greatly  assisted.  In  the  collo- 
cation of  me  and  injunctive  me  was  negative  volitive,  the  injunc- 
tive verbal,  later  me  was  felt  as  negative  and  the  injunctive  as 
volitive  verbal. 

'  Cf.  Buck,  Verb-system,  140;   Elmer,  A.J. P.,  15,  115  f. 

*  Note  the  increasing  modality  of  the  injunctive,  as  shown  by  Avery's  statis- 
tics. The  ratio  of  non-modal  to  modal  cases  in  R.V.  is  1:1,  in  A.V.  i :  10.  Cf. 
Thurneysen,  K.Z.,  27,  172  f.;  Brugmann,  M.U.,  3,  i,  f.,  and  Grundriss,  II,  414. 

3  Delbriick,  Syn.  Forsch.,  IV,  147. 
■♦  Cf.  Thurneysen  as  above. 


40         NEGATIVES  OF  THE  INDO-EUROPEAN  LANGUAGES 

So  long  as  the  original  feeling  was  kept  up,  as  in  Vedic  Skr., 
md  {me)  could  not  be  extended  to  other  volitive  forms.  But  we 
are  not  surprised  to  note  that  those  other  volitive  forms  some- 
times took  the  negative  used  with  non-volitive  forms.  So  na  was 
used  with  subjunctive,  optative,  and  even  with  the  injunctive,  but 
never  with  imperative.  But  later  in  Skr.,  when  md  was  felt  as  a 
true  negative,  its  use  could  be  and  was  extended  to  other  volitive 
forms;'  and  the  same  thing  took  place  in  Later  Av.,  O.P.,  Arm., 
Gr.,  and  Alb.  On  the  other  hand,  in  Germanic  and  Balto-Slavic 
the  process,  begun  in  Vedic  Skr.,  of  extending  the  use  of  fie  to 
volitive  forms  was  consistently  carried  out,  and  the  expression  of 
prohibition  thus  produced  drove  out  the  older  me  with  injunctive. 
In  Italic  and  Celtic,  in  the  same  way,  the  convictional  negatives 
came  to  be  used  with  volitive  forms,  and  the  old  form  of  prohibi- 
tion died  out.  Further,  in  these  languages  one  or  another  ablaut 
form  was  specialized  and  became  with  more  or  less  consistency 
the  special  negative  of  volitive  forms. 

'To  imperative,  optative,  future,  infinitive,  and  gerund.  Cf.  Speijer,  §  353, 
4.  The  use  of  md  with  augmented  past  forms  was  an  extension  of  the  modal 
force  of  the  injunctive  rather  than  an  extension  of  the  use  of  ind. 


Frank  Hamilton  Fowler,  born  November  i8,  1866,  at  Brad- 
ford, Illinois;  entered  the  Preparatory  School  of  Lombard  University 
in  September,  1883.  and  the  College  of  the  same  institution  in  Sep- 
tember, 1885;  graduated  from  Lombard  University  in  June,  1890; 
student  at  the  Johns  Hopkins  University  during  the  year  1890-92; 
teacher  of  Greek  and  Latin  in  Peaster  Academy,  Texas,  during  the 
year  1891-92;    Fellow  in  The  University  of  Chicago  1892-95. 


RETURN  TO  the  circulation  desk  of  any 
University  of  California  Library 

or  to  the 

NORTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 
BIdg.  400,  Richmond  Field  Station 
University  of  California 
Richmond,  CA  94804-4698 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

•  2-month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling 
(510)642-6753 

•  1-year  loans  may  be  recharged  by  bringing 
books  to  NRLF 

•  Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made 
4  days  prior  to  due  date 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 

JAN  1  8  2006 


DD20  15M  4-02 


U.C.BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


CD^b^fla7bfl 


jar'!!lK.-r: 


^«    "        '.■1: 


